Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 221 / Friday, November 16, 2007 / Notices 64591 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[OE Docket No. EA–331] 

Application to Export Electric Energy; 

The Royal Bank of Scotland plc 

AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery 

and Energy Reliability, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of application. 

SUMMARY: The Royal Bank of Scotland 

plc (RBS) has applied for authority to 

transmit electric energy from the United 

States to Mexico pursuant to section 

202(e) of the Federal Power Act. 

DATES: Comments, protests, or requests 

to intervene must be submitted on or 

before December 17, 2007. 

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–

586–5860). 

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 October 2, 2007, the Department 

of Energy (DOE) received an application 

from RBS for authority to transmit 

electric energy from the United States to 

Mexico as a power marketer. RBS has 

requested an electricity export 

authorization with a 5-year term. RBS 

does not own or control any generation, 

transmission, or distribution assets, nor 

does it have a franchised service area. 

The electric energy which RBS proposes 

to export to Mexico would be surplus 

energy purchased from electric utilities, 

Federal power marketing agencies, and 

other entities within the U.S. 

RBS will arrange for the delivery of 

exports to Mexico over the international 

transmission facilities owned by San 

Diego Gas & Electric Company, El Paso 

Electric Company, Central Power & 

Light Company, Sharyland Utilities, and 

Comision Federal de Electricidad, the 

national electric utility of Mexico. 

The construction, operation, 

maintenance, and connection of each of 

the international transmission facilities 

to be utilized by RBS has previously 

been authorized by a Presidential permit 

issued pursuant to Executive Order 

10485, as amended. 

DOE notes that RBS shall have no 

authority to export electricity to Mexico 

until the conclusion of this proceeding 

and the issuance of an order granting 

authority to export. 

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 Procedures (18 CFR 

385.211, 385.214). Fifteen copies of each 

petition and protest should be filed with 

DOE on or before the dates listed above. 

Comments on the RBS application to 

export electric energy to Mexico should 

be clearly marked with Docket No. EA–

331. Additional copies are to be filed 

directly with Paul Stevelman, Esq., 

Managing Director and Deputy General 

Counsel, RBS Greenwich Capital, 600 

Steamboat Road, Greenwich, CT 06830 

AND Brian Chisling, Esq., Senior 

Counsel, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett 

LLP, 425 Lexington Avenue, New York, 

NY 10017–3954. 

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/permitting/ 

electricity_imports_exports.htm, or by emailing Odessa Hopkins at 

Odessa.hopkins@hq.doe.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on November 9, 

2007. 

Anthony J. Como, 

Director, Permitting and Siting, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. 

[FR Doc. E7–22434 Filed 11–15–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

Notice of Availability of the Draft 

Programmatic Environmental Impact 

Statement for the Designation of 

Energy Corridors in Eleven Western 

States and Notice of Public Hearings 

AGENCIES: Office of Electricity Delivery 

and Energy Reliability (OE), Department 

of Energy (DOE) and the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM), Department of the 

Interior (DOI). 

ACTION: Notice of Availability of the 

Draft Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Designation of 

Energy Corridors in Eleven Western 

States and Notice of Public Hearings. 

SUMMARY: DOE and BLM of the DOI as 

co-lead agencies, and the U.S. Forest 

Service (FS) of the Department of 

Agriculture, the Department of Defense 

(DOD), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS) of the DOI as 

cooperating Federal Agencies (the 

Agencies) announce the availability of 

the Draft Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Designation of 

Energy Corridors in the 11 Western 

States (Draft PEIS) (DOE/EIS—0386) and 

the dates and locations for the public 

hearings to receive comments on the 

Draft PEIS. 

The Coeur d’Alene Tribe, the 

California Energy Commission (CEC), 

the California Public Utilities 

Commission (CPUC), the State of 

Wyoming, and the Lincoln, Sweetwater, 

and Uinta counties and conservation 

districts in Wyoming are also 

cooperating agencies. The Department 

of Commerce (DOC) and the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) 

are consulting agencies. 

The Agencies prepared the Draft PEIS 

pursuant to the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended, 

42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., the Council on 

Environmental Quality NEPA 

regulations, 40 CFR Parts 1500–1508, 

the DOE NEPA regulations, 10 CFR part 

1021, and 10 CFR part 1022, 

Compliance with Floodplain and 

Wetland Environmental Review 

Requirements, the BLM planning 

regulations, 43 CFR part 1600, and 

applicable FS planning regulations. 

Section 368 of the Energy Policy Act 

of 2005 (EPAct 2005), Public Law 109–

58, directs the Secretary of Agriculture, 

the Secretary of Commerce, the 

Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of 

Energy and the Secretary of the Interior, 

in consultation with FERC, States, tribal 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

64592 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 221 / Friday, November 16, 2007 / Notices 

or local units of governments, as 

appropriate, affected utility industries, 

and other interested persons, to 

designate, under their respective 

authorities, corridors for oil, gas, and 

hydrogen pipelines and electricity 

transmission and distribution facilities 

on Federal land in the 11 contiguous 

Western States (as defined in section 

103(o) of the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 

1702(o)), perform any environmental 

reviews that may be required to 

complete the designation of such 

corridors, and incorporate the 

designated corridors into relevant 

agency land use and resource 

management plans or equivalent plans. 

The 11 Western States are Arizona, 

California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, 

Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, 

Washington, and Wyoming. 

DATES: The 90-day public comment 

period begins with the publication of 

the Notice of Availability of the Draft 

PEIS in the Federal Register by the 

Environmental Protection Agency and 

continues until February 14, 2008. See 

Supplementary Information section for 

meeting dates. 

ADDRESSES: See Supplementary 

Information section for meeting 

addresses. Submit electronic comments 

and requests to speak at one of the 

public meetings on-line at http:// 

corridoreis.anl.gov. Mail comments to: 

West-wide Energy Corridor Draft PEIS, 

Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 S. 

Cass Avenue, Bldg. 900, Mailstop 4, 

Argonne, IL 60439; or fax comments 

toll-free to: 1–866–542–5904. Requests 

to speak at one of the meetings or for 

more information about the Draft PEIS 

may also be addressed to: Ms. LaVerne 

Kyriss, Office of Electricity Delivery and 

Energy Reliability (OE–20), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585, phone: 202–

586–1056, facsimile: 202–586–8008, or 

electronic mail at 

laverne.kyriss@hq.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information on the proposed project 

contact Ms. LaVerne Kyriss as indicated 

in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. 

For general information on the DOE 

NEPA process, contact: Carol M. 

Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA 

Policy and Compliance (GC–20), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585; phone: 202–

586–4600 or leave a message at 800–

472–2756; facsimile: 202–586–7031. 

For general information on the BLM’s 

NEPA process, contact: Ron Montagna, 

(202) 452–7782, or KateWinthrop, (202) 

452–5051, at: BLM, WO–350, MS 1000 

LS, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20240. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Agencies invite interested Members of 

Congress, state and local governments, 

other Federal agencies, American Indian 

tribal governments, organizations, and 

members of the public to provide 

comments on the Draft PEIS. Written 

and oral comments will be given equal 

weight, and the agencies will consider 

all comments received or postmarked by 

February 14, 2008 in preparing the Final 

PEIS. Comments received or postmarked 

after that date will be considered to the 

extent practicable. 

Public Meetings 

Public meeting dates and addresses 

are: 

1. January 8, 2008, 2 to 5 and 6 to 8 

p.m., Portland, OR: Doubletree Portland 

Lloyd Center, 1000 North West 

Multnomah and Sacramento, CA: 

California Energy Commission, 1516 

Ninth Street. 

2. January 10, 2008, 2 to 5 and 6 to 

8 p.m., Seattle, WA: Renaissance Hotel 

Seattle, 515 Madison Street and Ontario, 

CA: Ayres Hotel and Suites, Ontario 

Airport/Convention Center, 1945 East 

Holt Boulevard. 

3. January 15, 2008, 2 to 5 and 6 to 

8 p.m., Phoenix, AZ: BLM Training 

Center, 9828 North 31st Avenue and 

Grand Junction, CO: Marriott Courtyard, 

765 Horizon Drive. 

4. January 17, 2008, 2 to 5 and 6 to 

8 p.m., Las Vegas, NV: The Atomic 

Testing Museum, 1755 E. Flamingo 

Road and Salt Lake City, UT: Airport 

Hilton Hotel, 5151 Wiley Post Way. 

5. January 23, 2008, 2 to 5 p.m., 

Window Rock, AZ: Navajo Education 

Center, Morgan Boulevard. 

6. January 24, 2008, 2 to 5 and 6 to 

8 p.m., Albuquerque, NM: Holiday Inn 

and Suites, 5050 Jefferson Street. 

7. January 29, 2008, 2 to 5 and 6 to 

8 p.m., Helena, MT: Best Western 

Helena Great Northern Hotel, 835 Great 

Northern Boulevard and Cheyenne, WY: 

Best Western Hitching Post Inn and 

Conference Center, 1700 West Lincoln 

Way. 

8. January 31, 2008, 2 to 5 and 6 to 

8 p.m., Boise, ID: Best Western Vista Inn 

and Conference Center, 2645 Airport 

Way and Denver, CO: Holiday Inn 

Cherry Creek, 455 South Colorado 

Boulevard. 

9. February 5, 2008, 2 to 4 p.m., 

Washington, DC: Embassy Suites 

Washington Convention Center, 900 

10th Street, NW. 

Requests to speak at a specific public 

hearing should be received by DOE as 

indicated in the ADDRESSES section no 

later than two business days before that 

hearing. Requests to speak may also be 

made at the time of registration for the 

hearing(s). However, persons who have 

submitted advance requests to speak 

will be given priority if time should be 

limited during the hearing. Please be 

aware that anthrax screening delays 

conventional mail delivery to DOE. 

The Draft PEIS consists of a stand 

alone Summary, the PEIS Chapters 

(Volume 1, 567 pages), the PEIS 

Appendices (Volume 2, 400 pages), and 

Maps (Volume 3, 131 pages). The entire 

Draft PEIS is available online at http:// 

corridoreis.anl.gov or on a CD–ROM. 

Requests for paper copies of the Draft 

PEIS, or additional copies in either 

format should be addressed to Westwide Energy Corridor Draft PEIS, 9700 

South Cass Avenue, Building 900, 

Mailstop 4, Argonne, IL 60439. The 

Draft PEIS is also available on the DOE 

NEPA Web site at http:// 

www.eh.doe.gov/nepa/docs/deis/ 

deis.html. 

The Draft PEIS Volume 3 map atlas is 

printed on ledger-sized paper. The CD 

version of the Draft PEIS includes the 

map atlas in PDF format. The most 

powerful and flexible version of the 

map data is available on the project Web 

site (http://corridoreis.anl.gov). The 

Web site maps are available within a 

geographic information system (GIS) 

database that allows users to merge, 

enlarge, and view multiple map data 

layers. Software and instructions to use 

the GIS data are user friendly and 

available for free download from the 

public Web site. 

The purpose and need for the 

Agencies’ action is to implement EPAct 

Section 368 by designating corridors for 

the preferred locations of future oil, gas, 

and hydrogen pipelines and electricity 

transmission and distribution facilities 

and to incorporate the designated 

corridors into the relevant agency land 

use and resource management plans or 

equivalent plans. 

Section 368 directs the Agencies to 

take into account the need for upgraded 

and new infrastructure and to take 

actions to improve reliability, relieve 

congestion, and enhance the capability 

of the national grid to deliver energy. 

This action only pertains to the 

designation of corridors for potential 

facilities on Federal lands located 

within the 11 Western States. In 

addition, this action is intended to 

improve coordination among the 

Agencies to increase the efficiency of 

using designated corridors. 

In many areas of the United States, 

including the West, the infrastructure 

required to deliver energy has not 

always kept pace with growth in energy 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 221 / Friday, November 16, 2007 / Notices 64593 

demand. The Agencies hope to improve 

the delivery of energy in the West, while 

enhancing the western electric 

transmission grid for the future, by 

establishing a coordinated network of 

Federal energy corridors on Federal 

lands in the West. The Draft PEIS 

analyzes the environmental impacts of 

designating Federal energy corridors in 

11 Western States, and incorporating 

those designations into relevant agency 

land use and resource management 

plans or equivalent plans. 

The Draft PEIS analyzes two 

alternatives: A No Action Alternative 

and the Proposed Action to designate 

new and locally approved energy 

corridors (Proposed Action). Under the 

No Action Alternative, Federal energy 

corridors mandated by EPAct Section 

368 would not be designated on Federal 

lands in the 11 Western States; the 

siting and development of energy 

transport projects would continue under 

current agency procedures for granting 

rights-of-way (ROW), for which energy 

transport project applicants must satisfy 

the often disparate requirements of 

multiple agencies for the same project. 

There would be relatively little Westwide coordination for siting and 

permitting these projects to meet current 

and future energy needs in the 11 

Western States. 

Under the Proposed Action, the 

Agencies would designate and 

incorporate through relevant land use 

and resource management plans certain 

Federal energy corridors that would 

consist of existing, locally designated 

Federal energy corridors together with 

additional, newly designated energy 

corridors located on Federal land. These 

energy corridors would comprise a 

comprehensive, coordinated network of 

preferred locations for future energy 

projects that could be developed to 

satisfy demand for energy. Under the 

Proposed Action, approximately 6,055 

miles of Federal energy corridors would 

be designated for multimodal energy 

transmission and transportation in the 

11 Western States. The energy corridors 

would typically be 3,500 feet wide, 

though the width may vary in certain 

areas because of environmental, 

topographic or management constraints. 

BLM, DOD, FS and USFWS would 

amend their respective land use or 

equivalent plans to incorporate the 

designated energy corridors; the 

amendments would be effective upon 

signing of a Record(s) of Decision. The 

designation of energy corridors under 

the Proposed Action would require the 

amendment of the following land 

management or equivalent plans. 

LAND USE OR EQUIVALENT PLANS PROPOSED FOR AMENDMENT BY DESIGNATING EPACT SECTION 368 ENERGY

CORRIDORS ON FEDERAL LANDS IN THE 11 WESTERN STATES abc

State Land use plan Agency office(s) 

Arizona ............... Arizona Strip RMP ................................................................... BLM, Arizona Strip FO. 

Coronado NF LRMP ................................................................ FS, Coronado NF. 

Glen Canyon NRA GMP .......................................................... NPS, Glen Canyon NRA. 

Havasu NWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan .................. USFWS, Lake Havasu NWR. 

Kaibab NF LRMP ..................................................................... FS, Kaibab NF. 

Kingman RMP .......................................................................... BLM, Kingman FO, Lake Havasu FO. 

Lake Havasu RMP ................................................................... BLM, Lake Havasu FO. 

Lake Mead NRA GMP ............................................................. NPS, Lake Mead NRA. 

Lower Gila North MFP ............................................................. BLM, Hassayampa FO. 

Lower Gila South RMP ............................................................ BLM, Hassayampa FO, Lower Sonoran FO. 

Phoenix RMP ........................................................................... BLM, Tucson FO, Hassayampa FO, Lower Sonoran FO. 

Prescott NF LRMP ................................................................... FS, Prescott NF. 

Safford RMP ............................................................................. BLM, Safford FO, Tucson FO. 

Apache-Sitgreaves NF LRMP .................................................. FS, Apache-Sitgreaves NF. 

Tonto NF LRMP ....................................................................... FS, Tonto NF. 

Yuma Proving Ground INRMP ................................................. DOD, U.S. Army, Yuma Proving Ground. 

Yuma RMP ............................................................................... BLM, Yuma FO. 

California ............ Alturas RMP ............................................................................. BLM, Alturas FO. 

Angeles NF LRMP ................................................................... FS, Angeles NF. 

Arcata RMP .............................................................................. BLM, Arcata FO. 

Bishop RMP ............................................................................. BLM, Bishop FO. 

Caliente RMP ........................................................................... BLM, Bakersfield FO, Bishop FO, Ridgecrest FO. 

California Desert Conservation Area Plan ............................... BLM, Barstow FO, El Centro FO, Lake Havasu FO, Needles 

FO, Ridgecrest FO, Palm Springs-South Coast FO. 

Proposed Eagle Lake RMP ..................................................... BLM, Eagle Lake FO. 

China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station INRMP ..................... DOD, U.S. Navy, China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station. 

Cleveland NF LRMP ................................................................ FS, Cleveland NF. 

Eastern San Diego RMP .......................................................... BLM, El Centro FO. 

Havasu NWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan .................. USFWS, Lake Havasu NWR. 

Imperial Sand Dunes RAMP .................................................... BLM, El Centro FO. 

Inyo NF LRMP ......................................................................... FS, Inyo NF. 

Klamath NF LRMP ................................................................... FS, Klamath NF. 

Lassen NF LRMP ..................................................................... FS, Lassen NF. 

Modoc NF LRMP ..................................................................... FS, Modoc NF. 

Proposed Alturas RMP ............................................................ BLM, Alturas FO. 

Redding RMP ........................................................................... BLM, Redding FO. 

San Bernadino NF LRMP ........................................................ FS, San Bernadino NF. 

Shasta-Trinity NF LRMP .......................................................... FS, Shasta-Trinity NF. 

Proposed Sierra RMP .............................................................. BLM, Folsom FO. 

Six Rivers NF LRMP ................................................................ FS, Six Rivers NF. 

South Coast RMP .................................................................... BLM, Palm Springs-South Coast FO. 

Tahoe NF LRMP ...................................................................... FS, Tahoe NF. 

Proposed Surprise RMP .......................................................... BLM, Surprise FO. 

Ukiah RMP ............................................................................... BLM, Ukiah FO. 

Colorado ............. Arapaho-Roosevelt NF LRMP ................................................. FS, Arapaho-Roosevelt NF. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

64594 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 221 / Friday, November 16, 2007 / Notices 

LAND USE OR EQUIVALENT PLANS PROPOSED FOR AMENDMENT BY DESIGNATING EPACT SECTION 368 ENERGY

CORRIDORS ON FEDERAL LANDS IN THE 11 WESTERN STATES abc—Continued 

State Land use plan Agency office(s) 

Glenwood Springs RMP ........................................................... BLM, Glenwood Springs FO. 

Grand Junction RMP ................................................................ BLM, Grand Junction FO. 

Grand Mesa-Uncompahgre-Gunnison NF LRMP .................... FS, Grand Mesa-Uncompahgre-Gunnison NF. 

Gunnison RMP ......................................................................... BLM, Gunnison FO. 

Kremmling RMP ....................................................................... BLM, Kremmling FO. 

Little Snake RMP ..................................................................... BLM, Little Snake FO. 

Curecanti NCA GMP ................................................................ NPS, Curecanti NRA. 

Routt NF LRMP ........................................................................ FS, Medicine Bow and Routt NF, Thunder Basin NG. 

Royal Gorge RMP .................................................................... BLM, Royal Gorge FO. 

Pike-San Isabel NF LRMP ....................................................... FS, Pike-San Isabel NF. 

San Juan NF LRMP ................................................................. FS, San Juan NF. 

San Juan/San Miguel RMP ...................................................... BLM, Dolores FO, Uncompahgre FO. 

Uncompahgre Basin RMP ....................................................... BLM, Uncompahgre FO. 

White River RMP ..................................................................... BLM, White River FO. 

Idaho .................. Big Desert MFP ........................................................................ BLM, Upper Snake FO. 

Bruneau MFP ........................................................................... BLM, Bruneau FO. 

Cassia RMP ............................................................................. BLM, Burley FO. 

Coeur d’Alene RMP ................................................................. BLM, Coeur d’Alene FO. 

Idaho Panhandle NF LRMP ..................................................... FS, Idaho Panhandle NF. 

Jarbidge RMP .......................................................................... BLM, Bruneau FO, Four Rivers FO, Jarbridge FO. 

Kuna MFP ................................................................................ BLM, Four Rivers FO. 

Little Lost-Birch Creek MFP ..................................................... BLM, Upper Snake FO. 

Malad MFP ............................................................................... BLM, Pocatello FO. 

Medicine Lodge RMP ............................................................... BLM, Upper Snake FO. 

Monument RMP ....................................................................... BLM, Burley FO, Shoshone FO. 

Pocatello RMP ......................................................................... BLM, Pocatello FO. 

Owyhee RMP ........................................................................... BLM, Four Rivers FO, Owyhee FO. 

Caribou-Targhee NF LRMP ..................................................... FS, Caribou-Targhee NF. 

Twin Falls MFP ........................................................................ BLM, Burley FO. 

Montana ............. Beaverhead-Deerlodge NF LRMP ........................................... FS, Beaverhead-Deerlodge NF. 

Billings RMP ............................................................................. BLM, Billings FO. 

Dillon RMP ............................................................................... BLM, Dillon FO. 

Garnet RMP ............................................................................. BLM, Missoula FO. 

Headwaters RMP ..................................................................... BLM, Butte FO. 

Lolo NF LRMP ......................................................................... FS, Lolo NF. 

Nevada ............... Black Rock-High Rock NCA RMP ........................................... BLM, Winnemucca FO. 

Caliente MFP ........................................................................... BLM, Ely FO. 

Desert NWR CC Conservation Plan ........................................ USFWS, Desert NWR. 

Egan RMP ................................................................................ BLM, Ely FO. 

Elko RMP ................................................................................. BLM, Elko FO. 

Hawthorne Army Depot INRMP ............................................... DOD, U.S. Army, Hawthorne AD. 

Humboldt-Toiyabe NF LRMP ................................................... FS, Humboldt-Toiyabe NF. 

Carson City Field Office Consolidated Resource Management Plan.BLM, Carson City FO. 

Lake Mead NRA GMP ............................................................. NPS, Lake Mead NRA. 

Las Vegas RMP ....................................................................... BLM, Las Vegas FO. 

Nellis AFB Plan 126–4 INRMP ................................................ DOD, U.S. Air Force, Nellis AFB. 

Paradise-Denio MFP ................................................................ BLM, Winnemucca FO. 

Schell MFP ............................................................................... BLM, Ely FO. 

Sonoma Gerlach MFP ............................................................. BLM, Winnemucca FO. 

Tonopah RMP .......................................................................... BLM, Battle Mountain FO. 

Tuledad/Homecamp MFP ........................................................ BLM, Surprise FO. 

Wells RMP ............................................................................... BLM, Elko FO. 

New Mexico ....... Carlsbad RMP .......................................................................... BLM, Carlsbad FO. 

Farmington RMP ...................................................................... BLM, Farmington FO. 

Fort Bliss INRMP ..................................................................... DOD, U.S. Army, Fort Bliss. 

Mimbres RMP .......................................................................... BLM, Las Cruces DO. 

Rio Puerco RMP ...................................................................... BLM, Rio Puerco FO. 

Roswell RMP ............................................................................ BLM, Roswell FO. 

Sevilleta NWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan ................. USFWS, Sevilletta NWR. 

Socorro RMP ............................................................................ BLM, Socoro FO. 

White Sands RMP .................................................................... BLM, Las Cruces DO. 

Oregon ............... Andrews-Steens RMP .............................................................. BLM, Andrews FO. 

Baker RMP ............................................................................... BLM, Baker FO. 

Brothers-Lapine RMP ............................................................... BLM, Central Oregon FO, Deschutes FO. 

Ochocco NF LRMP .................................................................. FS, Ochocco NF. 

Deschutes NF LRMP ............................................................... FS, Deschutes NF. 

Eugene RMP ............................................................................ BLM, Upper Willamette FO. 

Fremont NF LRMP ................................................................... FS, Winema-Fremont NFs. 

Klamath Falls RMP .................................................................. BLM, Klamath Falls FO. 

Klamath NF LRMP ................................................................... FS, Klamath NF. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 221 / Friday, November 16, 2007 / Notices 64595 

LAND USE OR EQUIVALENT PLANS PROPOSED FOR AMENDMENT BY DESIGNATING EPACT SECTION 368 ENERGY

CORRIDORS ON FEDERAL LANDS IN THE 11 WESTERN STATES abc—Continued 

State Land use plan Agency office(s) 

Lakeview RMP ......................................................................... BLM, Lakeview FO. 

Medford RMP ........................................................................... BLM, Ashland FO, Butte Falls FO, Glendale FO. 

Mt. Hood NF LRMP ................................................................. FS, Mt. Hood NF. 

Roseburg RMP ......................................................................... BLM, South River FO, Swiftwater FO, Upper Willamette FO. 

Salem RMP .............................................................................. BLM, Cascades FO, Tillamook FO. 

Southeastern Oregon RMP ...................................................... BLM, Jordan FO, Malheur FO. 

Three Rivers RMP ................................................................... BLM, Three Rivers FO. 

Two Rivers RMP ...................................................................... BLM, Deschutes FO. 

Umatilla NF LRMP ................................................................... FS, Umatilla NF. 

Upper Deschutes RMP ............................................................ BLM, Deschutes FO. 

Winema NF LRMP ................................................................... FS, Winema-Fremont NFs. 

Utah .................... Ashley NF LRMP ..................................................................... FS, Ashley NF. 

Beaver RMP ............................................................................. BLM, Kanab FO. 

CBGA ....................................................................................... BLM, Cedar City FO. 

Book Cliffs RMP ....................................................................... BLM, Vernal FO. 

Wasatch-Cache NF LRMP ....................................................... FS, Wasatch-Cache NF. 

Diamond Mountain RMP .......................................................... BLM, Vernal FO. 

Dixie NF LRMP ........................................................................ FS, Dixie NF. 

Fishlake NF LRMP ................................................................... FS, Fishlake NF. 

Grand RMP .............................................................................. BLM, Moab FO. 

Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument Management 

Plan.

BLM, Grand Staircase-Escalante NM FO. 

House Range RMP .................................................................. BLM, Fillmore FO. 

Mountain Valley MFP ............................................................... BLM, Richfield FO. 

Paria MFP ................................................................................ BLM, Kanab FO. 

Pinyon MFP .............................................................................. BLM, Cedar City FO. 

Pony Express RMP .................................................................. BLM, Salt Lake FO. 

Price River RMP ...................................................................... BLM, Price FO. 

San Juan RMP ......................................................................... BLM, Moab FO, Monticello FO. 

St. George (Dixie) RMP ........................................................... BLM, St. George FO. 

Uinta NF LRMP ........................................................................ FS, Uinta NF. 

Vermillion MFP ......................................................................... BLM, Kanab FO. 

Warm Springs RMP ................................................................. BLM, Fillmore FO. 

Zion MFP .................................................................................. BLM, Kanab FO. 

Washington ........ Mount Baker-Snoqualmie NF LRMP ....................................... FS, Mount Baker-Snoqualmie NF. 

Spokane RMP .......................................................................... BLM, Wenatchee FO. 

Wenatchee NF LRMP .............................................................. FS, Wenatchee NF. 

Wyoming ............ Ashley NF LRMP ..................................................................... FS, Ashley NF. 

Cody RMP ................................................................................ BLM, Cody FO. 

Grass Creek RMP .................................................................... BLM, Worland FO. 

Great Divide RMP .................................................................... BLM, Rawlins FO. 

Green River RMP ..................................................................... BLM, Rock Springs FO. 

Kemmerer RMP ....................................................................... BLM, Kemmerer FO. 

Lander RMP ............................................................................. BLM, Lander FO. 

Thunder Basin National Grassland LRMP ............................... FS, Medicine Bow and Routt NF, Thunder Basin NG. 

Platte River RMP ..................................................................... BLM, Casper FO. 

Washakie RMP ........................................................................ BLM, Worland FO. 

a AFB = Air Force Base; BLM = Bureau of Land Management; CBGA = Cedar-Beaver-Garfield-Antimony; CCCP = Complex Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan; DO = district office; DOD = Department of Defense; FO = field office; FS = Forest Service; GMP = General Management 

Plan; INRMP = Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan; LMP = Land Management Plan; LRMP = Land and Resource Management 

Plan; MFP = Management Framework Plan; NCA = National Conservation Area; NF = National Forest; NM = National Monument; NG = National 

Grassland; NPS = National Park Service; NRA = National Recreation Area; NWR = National Wildlife Refuge; RAMP= Recreation Area Management Plan; RFP= Revised Forest Plan, RMP = Resource Management Plan; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. b This list represents the most current plans. This list differs in some particulars from the list in the Draft PEIS, Vol. 2, which went to print prior 

to these changes. Since planning is dynamic and there may also be further changes in the locations of specific corridors, the Final PEIS may 

also include changes in this list. c The PEIS identifies corridors through three national wildlife refuges, administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Development on these refuges may only occur if the specific proposed project is determined to be compatible with refuge purposes and the mission of 

the National Wildlife Refuge System. Existing refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan(s) may require amendment should a specific project be 

found compatible, and subsequent right-of-way permitting by the USFWS occur. 

In addition to designating Federal 

energy corridors through these 

amendments, the Agencies would 

establish cooperative procedures to 

expedite the application process for 

energy projects proposed to be sited 

within these corridors. 

Under the No Action Alternative, no 

Federal energy corridors would be 

designated pursuant to Section 368. The 

No Action alternative represents the 

status quo. Siting and development 

would continue, likely without 

coordination among the Agencies, under 

each agency’s procedures for granting 

ROW. It would be incorrect to assume 

that the No Action Alternative signifies 

that there will be no groundbreaking for 

energy projects at some point in the 

future. 

Neither alternative authorizes sitespecific energy transport projects. The 

Draft PEIS does not examine the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

64596 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 221 / Friday, November 16, 2007 / Notices 

environmental impacts of specific 

projects or related ROW that may or 

may not at some point be proposed for 

the Federal energy corridors. These 

projects would be subject to individual, 

project-specific NEPA review at the 

siting stage. 

Although actual environmental 

impacts must inevitably await proposals 

before being analyzed, the Agencies are 

preparing a PEIS at the designation stage 

because they believe it is an appropriate 

time to examine the region-wide 

environmental concerns. The Agencies 

expect that the PEIS will greatly assist 

subsequent, site-specific analyses for 

individual project proposals by allowing 

the Agencies to incorporate this PEIS 

into those later analyses. 

Availability of the Draft PEIS 

The Agencies distributed copies of the 

Draft PEIS to appropriate members of 

Congress, state and local government 

officials in the 11 Western States, 

American Indian tribal governments, 

and other Federal agencies, groups, and 

interested parties. Copies of the 

document may be obtained online at the 

project Web site or by contacting DOE 

as provided in the ADDRESSES section of 

this notice. Copies of the Draft PEIS are 

also available for inspection at the 

Agencies’ affected field office locations 

(see list above) within the 11 Western 

States and at public libraries near public 

meeting locations. A list of these 

libraries is available on the project Web 

site. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 24, 

2007. 

Michael D. Nedd, 

Assistant Director, Minerals, Realty and 

Resource Protection, Bureau of Land 

Management, Department of the Interior. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 30, 

2007. 

Kevin M. Kolevar, 

Assistant Secretary, Office of Electricity 

Delivery and Energy Reliability, Department 

of Energy. 

[FR Doc. 07–5716 Filed 11–15–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Docket No. CP08–13–000; Docket No. PF07–

3–000 

Floridian Natural Gas Storage 

Company, LLC; Notice of Application 

November 8, 2007. 

Take notice that on October 31, 2007, 

Floridian Natural Gas Storage Company, 

LLC (FGS), 1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 

4361, Houston, Texas 77002, filed an 

abbreviated application pursuant to 

section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act 

(NGA) and Parts 157 and 284 of the 

Commission’s regulations, for a 

certificate of public convenience and 

necessity to construct and operate the 

Floridian Natural Gas Storage Project in 

Martin County, Florida; a blanket 

certificate to perform certain routine 

activities and operations; and a blanket 

certificate to provide open access 

storage services, all as more fully set 

forth in the application. This filing is 

available for review at the Commission 

in the Public Reference Room or may be 

viewed on the Commission’s Web site at 

http://www.ferc.gov using the 

‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket 

number excluding the last three digits in 

the docket number field to access the 

document. For assistance, please contact 

FERC Online Support at 

FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or toll 

free at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY, 

contact (202) 502–8659. 

FGS requests authorization to: (1) 

Construct, operate a natural gas storage 

facility in Martin County, Florida; (2) a 

blanket certificate pursuant to Subpart G 

of Part 284 that will permit FGS to 

provide open-access firm and 

interruptible natural gas storage services 

on behalf of others in interstate 

commerce; (3) a blanket certificate 

pursuant to Subpart F Part 157 that will 

permit FGS to perform certain routine 

activities and operations; (4) 

authorization to provide the proposed 

storage services at market-based rates; 

and (5) approval of a pro forma FERC 

Gas Tariff, under which FGS will 

provide open-access gas storage services 

in interstate commerce. 

FGS states that the project would be 

located on approximately 145 acres at 

the site of the former Florida Steel 

manufacturing facility, about two miles 

north of Indiantown in Martin County, 

Florida. FGS states that the project 

would include the initial construction 

of one nominal 190,000 m3 liquified 

natural gas storage tank, liquefaction 

systems, vaporization systems and two 

parallel pipelines, one to receive gas 

and one to send out gas, both 

approximately four miles in length, that 

would connect the facility with the 

regional gas infrastructure, via an 

interconnection with Gulfstream 

Natural Gas System, L.L.C. and the 

Florida Power and Light Company 20- 

inch lateral that connects to Florida Gas 

Transmission Company’s mainline 

system. 

FGS proposes to construct the project 

in two phases. It is stated that upon 

planned commercial operation in late 

May 2011, Phase I of the project would 

make available liquefied natural gas 

storage capacity of 4 Bcf, with a design 

sendout capacity of 400 MMscf/d and a 

design liquefaction rate of 50 MMscf/d. 

It is stated that Phase 2 of the project 

would involve the construction of a 

second, identical storage tank and 

additional liquefaction and vaporization 

capacity and commercial operation is 

anticipated no later than March 2016, 

but may be advanced to such earlier 

date as the market may require. 

FGS requests that the Commission 

waive the requirements of (i) section 

284.7(d)—the segmentation 

requirement; (ii) section 284.7(e) and 

284.10 which impose requirements 

relating to the design of rates that are 

not applicable to market-based rates; 

(iii) section 260.2 and Part 201 

concerning accounting and reporting 

requirements which are appropriate for 

a cost-of-service rate structure; (iv) 

partial waiver of section 284.12(a)(1)(iv) 

to the extent it requires compliance with 

the electronic data interchange 

standards established by NAESB; (v) 

exemption from Order Nos. 587–G and 

587–L regarding the netting and trading 

of imbalances; (vi) the requirements of 

Part 358 concerning Standards of 

Conduct for transmission providers; and 

(vii) the ‘‘shipper must have title’’

policy for off-system capacity. In 

addition, FGS requests that the 

Commission waive the requirement to 

file Exhibits K, L, N and O because FGS 

is seeking authority to charge marketbased rates, and Exhibit H because 

FGS’s customers are responsible for 

their own gas. Also, FGS requests that 

the Commission waive the requirements 

of section 157.6(b)(8) and 157.20(c)(3) 

for projected cost-of-service data in 

advance of a Commission determination 

of appropriate rate treatment and 

updated cost data after new facilities are 

placed in service; and section 

157.6(a)(3)(i) concerning the filing of 

certain exhibits in electronic format. 

Any initial questions regarding FGS’s 

proposal in this application should be 

directed to Joan M. Darby, Dickstein 

Shapiro LLP, 1825 Eye Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20006, telephone: (202) 

420–2200 or e-mail: 

darby@dicksteinshapiro.com or J. 

Bradley Williams, Floridian Natural Gas 

Storage Company, LLC, 1000 Louisiana 

Street, Suite 4361, Houston, Texas 

77002, telephone: (800) 621–6843. 

On January 10, 2007, the Commission 

staff granted FGS’s request to utilize the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) Pre-Filing Process and assigned 

Docket No. PF07–3–000 to staff 

activities involving the project. Now, as 

of the filing of this application on 

October 31, 2007, the NEPA Pre-Filing 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES