Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 25, 2009 / Notices 8517 

consistent with legislated activities and 

to determine the dollar share of the 

Congressional appropriation to be 

awarded to successful applicants. 

This information collection is being 

submitted under the Streamlined 

Clearance Process for Discretionary 

Grant Information Collections (1894– 

0001). Therefore, the 30-day public 

comment period notice will be the only 

public comment notice published for 

this information collection. 

Requests for copies of the information 

collection submission for OMB review 

may be accessed from http:// 

edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the 

‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and 

by clicking on link number 3958. 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. 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. E9–3994 Filed 2–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[OE Docket No. EA–349] 

Application To Export Electric Energy; 

Bruce Power Inc. 

AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery 

and Energy Reliability, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of application. 

SUMMARY: Bruce Power Inc. has applied 

for authority to transmit electric energy 

from the United States to Canada 

pursuant to section 202(e) of the Federal 

Power Act. 

DATES: Comments, protests, or requests 

to intervene must be submitted on or 

before March 27, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Comments, protests, or 

requests to intervene should be 

addressed as follows: Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy 

Reliability, Mail Code: OE–20, U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0350 (FAX 202– 

586–8008). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Russell (Program Office) 202–586– 

9624 or Michael Skinker (Program 

Attorney) 202–586–2793. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports of 

electricity from the United States to a 

foreign country are regulated by the 

Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to 

sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the 

Department of Energy Organization Act 

(42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require 

authorization under section 202(e) of 

the FPA (16 U.S.C. 824a(e)). 

On February 3, 2009, DOE received an 

application from Bruce Power Inc. for 

authority to transmit electric energy 

from the United States to Canada as a 

power marketer using international 

transmission facilities located at the 

United States border with Canada. 

Bruce Power Inc. is incorporated under 

the Business Corporations Act (Ontario) 

and has its principal place of business 

in Tiverton, Ontario, Canada. Bruce 

Power Inc. does not own any electric 

transmission facilities nor does it hold 

a franchised service area. The electric 

energy which Bruce Power Inc. 

proposes to export to Canada would be 

surplus energy purchased from electric 

utilities, Federal power marketing 

agencies, and other entities within the 

United States. Bruce Power Inc. has 

requested an electricity export 

authorization with a 5-year term. 

Bruce Power Inc. will arrange for the 

delivery of exports to Canada over the 

international transmission facilities 

owned by Bangor Hydro-Electric 

Company, Basin Electric Power 

Cooperative, Bonneville Power 

Administration, Eastern Maine Electric 

Cooperative, International Transmission 

Co., Joint Owners of the Highgate 

Project, Long Sault, Inc., Maine Electric 

Power Company, Maine Public Service 

Company, Minnesota Power, Inc., 

Minnkota Power Cooperative, Inc., New 

York Power Authority, Niagara Mohawk 

Power Corp., Northern States Power 

Company, Vermont Electric Power 

Company, and Vermont Electric 

Transmission Co. 

The construction, operation, 

maintenance, and connection of each of 

the international transmission facilities 

to be utilized by Bruce Power Inc. have 

previously been authorized by a 

Presidential permit issued pursuant to 

Executive Order 10485, as amended. 

Procedural Matters: Any person 

desiring to become a party to these 

proceedings or to be heard by filing 

comments or protests to this application 

should file a petition to intervene, 

comment, or protest at the address 

provided above in accordance with 

§§ 385.211 or 385.214 of the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission’s Rules 

of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 

385.211, 385.214). Fifteen copies of each 

petition and protest should be filed with 

DOE on or before the date listed above. 

Comments on the Bruce Power Inc. 

application to export electric energy to 

Canada should be clearly marked with 

Docket No. EA–349. Additional copies 

are to be filed directly with Richard 

Horrobin, Vice President of Power 

Marketing, Bruce Power L.P., 177 Tie 

Road, R.R. #2, P.O. Box 1540, Building 

B10, Tiverton, ON N0G 2T0 AND Brian 

Armstrong, Executive Vice President & 

General Counsel, Bruce Power L.P., 177 

Tie Road, R.R. #2, P.O. Box 1540, 

Building B10, Tiverton, ON N0G 2T0. A 

final decision will be made on this 

application after the environmental 

impacts have been evaluated pursuant 

to the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969, and a determination is 

made by DOE that the proposed action 

will not adversely impact on the 

reliability of the U.S. electric power 

supply system. 

Copies of this application will be 

made available, upon request, for public 

inspection and copying at the address 

provided above, by accessing the 

program Web site at http:// 

www.oe.energy.gov/ 

permits_pending.htm, or by e-mailing 

Odessa Hopkins at 

Odessa.hopkins@hq.doe.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 18, 

2009. 

Anthony J. Como, 

Director, Permitting and Siting, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. 

[FR Doc. E9–4051 Filed 2–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[OE Docket No. PP–334] 

Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement; 

Energia Sierra Juarez U.S. 

Transmission, LLC 

AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE). 

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) announces its intention to 

prepare an EIS on the proposed Federal 

action of granting a Presidential permit 

to construct a new electric transmission 

line across the U.S.-Mexico border in 

southeastern California. DOE has 

determined that issuance of a 

Presidential permit for the proposed 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
8518 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 25, 2009 / Notices 

project would constitute a major Federal 

action that may have a significant effect 

upon the environment within the 

meaning of the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). For this 

reason, DOE intends to prepare an EIS 

entitled Energia Sierra Juarez 

Transmission Line Environmental 

Impact Statement (DOE/EIS–0414) to 

address potential environmental 

impacts from the proposed action and 

reasonable alternatives. The EIS will be 

prepared in compliance with NEPA and 

applicable regulations, including DOE 

NEPA implementing regulations at 10 

CFR Part 1021. Because of previous 

public participation activities, DOE does 

not plan to conduct additional scoping 

meetings for this EIS. However, any 

timely written comments submitted will 

be considered by DOE in determining 

the scope of the EIS. 

DATES: As discussed below, the public 

participation process that DOE 

conducted following publication of a 

notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental assessment will serve as 

the scoping for this EIS. DOE will 

consider any additional comments 

received or postmarked by March 27, 

2009 in defining the scope of the EIS. 

Comments received or postmarked after 

that date will be considered to the 

extent practicable. 

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–20), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585; or by facsimile 

at 202–586–7031. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Jerry Pell, 202–586–3362, or 

Jerry.Pell@hq.doe.gov. For general 

information on the DOE NEPA process, 

contact Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom at 202– 

586–4600 or leave a message at 800– 

472–2756. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive 

Order (EO) 10485, as amended by EO 

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 EO 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 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 EO have 

been codified at 10 CFR 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. 

Energia Sierra Juarez U.S. 

Transmission, LLC (ESJ, formerly Baja 

Wind U.S. Transmission, LLC), has 

applied to DOE’s Office of Electricity 

Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE) for 

a Presidential permit to construct either 

a double-circuit 230,000-volt (230-kV) 

or a single-circuit 500-kV transmission 

line on either lattice towers or steel 

monopoles. ESJ’s proposed transmission 

line would connect wind turbines (the 

La Rumorosa Project) to be located in 

the vicinity of La Rumorosa, Baja 

California, Mexico, to the existing 

Southwest Powerlink (SWPL) 500-kV 

transmission line. The ESJ Presidential 

permit application, including associated 

maps and drawings, can be downloaded 

in its entirety from the DOE program 

Web site at http://www.oe.energy.gov/ 

permits_pending.htm (see PP–334). 

One portion of the proposed 

transmission project would consist of 

two miles of transmission located in 

Mexico that would be constructed, 

owned, operated, and maintained by a 

subsidiary of Sempra Energy Mexico 

and would be subject to the permitting 

requirements of the Mexican 

Government. The remaining portion of 

the proposed transmission project 

would consist of a one-mile 

transmission line constructed by ESJ 

within the United States on private 

land. The entire electrical output of the 

La Rumorosa Project (1250 megawatts) 

would be dedicated to the U.S. market 

and delivered using the proposed 

international transmission line. For 

reasons discussed below, the EIS will 

consider only impacts that occur inside 

the United States. 

ESJ’s proposed transmission line 

would connect to a substation to be 

constructed by the San Diego Gas & 

Electric Company in response to 

requests by power suppliers to connect 

to the SWPL. The substation, to be 

known as the East County Substation, 

would be located just south of the SWPL 

right-of-way near the community of 

Jacumba, California, and would contain 

equipment for accepting 

interconnections at both the 230-kV and 

the 500-kV level. The 230-kV 

connection equipment would be located 

just to the west of the 500-kV 

connection equipment, both within the 

confines of the substation boundary. 

Accordingly, ESJ has identified two 

routing/voltage alternatives to coincide 

with interconnection at the 230-kV or at 

the 500-kV level. 

Agency Purpose and Need, Proposed 

Action, and Alternatives 

The purpose and need for DOE’s 

action is to decide whether to grant 

ESJ’s application for a Presidential 

permit for the proposed international 

electric transmission line. DOE’s 

proposed action is to issue a 

Presidential permit for the construction, 

operation, maintenance, and connection 

of the proposed international electric 

transmission line. If granted, the 

Presidential permit would authorize 

only the one-mile portion of the 

applicant’s proposal that would be 

constructed and operated wholly within 

the United States. 

Both of ESJ’s proposed route 

alternatives would cross the U.S.- 

Mexico border at the same location. 

However, the route alternative 

identified as A1 in the Presidential 

permit application would be 

constructed at 500-kV and would be the 

eastern alternative; the other route 

alternative, identified as A2, would be 

constructed at 230-kV and be located to 

the west of the A1 alternative. Both 

alternatives would be located wholly 

within private property in eastern San 

Diego County near the unincorporated 

community of Jacumba. In addition to 

the alternatives proposed by ESJ, DOE 

will also consider the environmental 

impacts of a ‘‘No Action’’ alternative. 

DOE originally considered an 

environmental assessment (EA) (to be 

titled Baja Wind U.S. Transmission 

Environmental Assessment) to be the 

appropriate level of review under 

NEPA. DOE published a Notice of Intent 

to Prepare an Environmental 

Assessment and to Conduct Public 

Scoping Meetings in the Federal 

Register on August 4, 2008 (73 FR 

45218). In that notice DOE stated ‘‘if at 

any time during preparation of the EA 

DOE determines that an environmental 

impact statement (EIS) is needed * * * 

DOE will consider any comments on the 

scope of the EA received during [the EA 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 25, 2009 / Notices 8519 

scoping process] in preparing such an 

EIS.’’ 

Identification of Environmental Issues 

When publishing its notice of intent 

to prepare an EA on August 4, 2008, 

DOE opened a 30-day scoping period 

during which the public was invited to 

participate in the identification of 

potential environmental impacts that 

may result from construction of the ESJ 

transmission line project and reasonable 

alternatives. DOE conducted two 

scoping meetings in Jacumba. Nine 

issues and concerns were identified as 

a result of the scoping opportunity. 

These issues and concerns are (1) visual 

impacts, (2) avian mortality, (3) impacts 

to protected, threatened, endangered, or 

sensitive species of animals or plants, or 

their critical habitats, (4) impacts to 

cultural or historic resources, (6) 

impacts to human health and safety, (6) 

impacts to air, soil, and water, (7) land 

use impacts, (8) impacts of seismic 

activity, and (9) impacts from 

development of wind generation. In the 

EIS DOE will analyze these issues and 

others it finds appropriate to address, 

such as greenhouse gas emissions and 

global climate change and also 

intentional destructive acts, such as 

terrorism. No additional construction or 

routing alternatives were proposed as a 

result of the scoping process. 

Several commenters in this 

proceeding have asked DOE to evaluate 

the impacts associated with activities 

that will occur inside Mexico (e.g., from 

the construction and operation in 

Mexico of the wind generators). NEPA 

does not require an analysis of 

environmental impacts that occur 

within another sovereign nation that 

result from approved actions by that 

nation. The EIS, however, will evaluate 

all relevant environmental impacts 

within the U.S. related to or caused by 

project-related activities in Mexico. 

Based on comments received during 

the initial EA process, and the potential 

for public controversy, DOE has 

determined an EIS to be the proper 

NEPA compliance document. 

EIS Preparation and Schedule 

In preparing the Draft EIS, DOE will 

consider comments received during the 

scoping period. Because of previous 

public participation activities, DOE does 

not plan to conduct additional scoping 

meetings for this EIS. However, any 

timely additional written comments 

submitted will be considered by DOE in 

determining the scope of the EIS. 

DOE anticipates issuing a Draft EIS in 

the fall of 2009. DOE will provide a 

public comment period of at least 45 

days from the Environmental Protection 

Agency’s (EPA’s) Notice of Availability 

(NOA) of the Draft EIS and will hold at 

least one public hearing during the 

public comment period. 

DOE will include all comments 

received on the Draft EIS, and responses 

to those comments, in the Final EIS. 

DOE will issue a Record of Decision no 

sooner than 30 days from EPA’s NOA of 

the Final EIS. 

Persons who submitted comments 

during the scoping process will receive 

a copy of the Draft EIS. Other persons 

who would like to receive a copy of the 

document for review when it is issued 

should notify Dr. Jerry Pell at the 

address provided above. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 18, 

2009. 

Patricia A. Hoffman, 

Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. 

[FR Doc. E9–4049 Filed 2–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Project No. 12619–002; Project No. 13363– 

000; Project No. 13364–000; Project No. 

13366–000] 

Cascade Creek, LLC; City and Borough 

of Wrangell, AK; Petersburg Municipal 

Power and Light; City of Angoon, AK; 

Notice of Competing Preliminary 

Permit Applications Accepted for 

Filing and Soliciting Comment, 

Motions To Intervene, and Competing 

Applications 

February 18, 2009. 

Cascade Creek, LLC (Cascade), City 

and Borough of Wrangell, Alaska 

(Wrangell), Petersburg Municipal Power 

and Light (Petersburg) and the City of 

Angoon, Alaska filed applications, 

pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal 

Power Act, proposing to study the 

feasibility of the Ruth Lake Project, to be 

located on Ruth Lake and Delta Creek, 

in an unorganized Borough near 

Petersburg, Alaska. There are no 

existing facilities. The project would be 

located in the Tongass National Forest. 

All of these applications were filed 

electronically and given the filing date 

of February 3, 2009, at 8:30 a.m. 

The proposed Ruth Lake Projects: 

The proposed Ruth Lake Project by 

Cascade Creek, LLC for Project No. 

12619–002 filed on February 3, 2009 at 

8:30 a.m. would consist of: (1) A 

proposed 170-foot-high concrete arch 

dam at the exit of the natural Ruth Lake; 

(2) an existing reservoir having a surface 

area of 130 acres and a storage capacity 

of 17,000 acre-feet and normal water 

surface elevation of 1,527 feet mean sea 

level (msl); (3) a proposed 12,600-footlong, 6 to 12-inch diameter combination 

bored tunnel and steel penstock; (4) a 

proposed powerhouse containing three 

new generating units having an installed 

capacity of 20 megawatts; (5) an existing 

20-mile-long, 138 kilovolt transmission 

line; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The 

proposed Ruth Lake Project would have 

an average annual generation of 70 

gigawatt-hours. Cascade is also 

exploring alternatives that would 

connect this project to their Cascade 

Creek Project, which they have 

preliminary permit for FERC No. 12495. 

The proposed Ruth Lake Project by 

City and Borough of Wrangell, Alaska 

for Project No. 13363–000 filed on 

February 3, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. would 

consist of: (1) A proposed 170-foot-high 

concrete arch dam at the exit of the 

natural Ruth Lake; (2) an existing 

reservoir having a surface area of 130 

acres and a storage capacity of 17,000 

acre-feet and normal water surface 

elevation of 1,527 feet mean sea level 

(msl); (3) a proposed 12,600-foot-long, 6 

to 12-foot diameter combination bored 

tunnel and steel penstock; (4) a 

proposed powerhouse containing three 

new generating units having an installed 

capacity of 20 megawatts; (5) an existing 

20-mile-long, 138 kilovolt transmission 

line; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The 

proposed Ruth Lake Project would have 

an average annual generation of 70 

gigawatt-hours. 

The proposed Ruth Lake Project by 

Petersburg Municipal Power and Light 

for Project No. 13363–000 filed on 

February 3, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. would 

consist of: (1) A proposed 200-foot-high 

concrete faced rockfill dam at the exit of 

the natural Ruth Lake; (2) an existing 

reservoir having a surface area of 190 

acres and a storage capacity of 17,000 

acre-feet and normal water surface 

elevation of 1,560 feet mean sea level 

(msl); (3) a proposed 3,500-foot-long, 10- 

foot diameter tunnel and a 7,800-footlong, 6-foot-diameter steel penstock; (4) 

a proposed powerhouse containing 

three new generating units having an 

installed capacity of 20 megawatts; (5) 

would connect directly to their 

distribution system; and (6) appurtenant 

facilities. The proposed Ruth Lake 

Project would have an average annual 

generation of 70 gigawatt-hours. 

The proposed Ruth Lake Project by 

City of Angoon, Alaska for Project No. 

13366–000 filed on February 3, 2009 at 

8:30 a.m. would consist of: (1) A 

proposed 170-foot-high concrete arched 

dam at the exit of the natural Ruth Lake; 

(2) an existing reservoir having a surface 

area of 130 acres and a storage capacity 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES