30558 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 122 / Friday, June 26, 2009 / Notices 

Docket No. EA–358. Additional copies 

are to be filed directly with Larry S. 

Severson, Severson, Sheldon, Dougherty 

& Molenda P.A., Suite 600, 7300 West 

147th Street, Apple Valley, Minnesota 

55124–7580 and Michael Tufte, Twin 

Cities Power, LLC, 17725 Juniper Path, 

Lakeville, Minnesota 55044. 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 June 19, 

2009. 

Anthony J. Como, 

Director, Permitting and Siting, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. 

[FR Doc. E9–15127 Filed 6–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Variance for Certain Requirements for 

the Electric Drive Vehicle Battery and 

Component Manufacturing Initiative 

Under the Department of Energy’s 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Implementing Procedures 

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of variance. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) 

decision, pursuant to 10 CFR 

1021.343(c), that it is in the interest of 

public welfare to grant a variance from 

certain requirements of its National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 

1021) in regard to the review of 

applications under the Electric Drive 

Vehicle Battery and Component 

Manufacturing Initiative funded by the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). The 

variance is limited to certain 

requirements identified in 10 CFR 

1021.216, Procurement, Financial 

Assistance, and Joint Ventures. The 

variance in no way affects the 

requirement to prepare an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement for any 

application selected for funding. The 

merit review of applications in response 

to this funding opportunity will include 

consideration of the potentially 

significant environmental impacts of the 

projects proposed for funding that are 

within the competitive range. By 

providing this variance, DOE can reduce 

the time needed to select applications 

for possible future funding consistent 

with the sense of urgency underpinning 

the Recovery Act. 

DATES: Effective date: June 26, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

R. Paul Detwiler, Director, Office of 

Project Facilitation and Compliance, 

National Energy Technology Laboratory, 

626 Cochrans Mill Road, P.O. Box 

10940, Pittsburgh, PA 15236–0940 or 

Ralph.Detwiler@netl.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The purposes of the Recovery Act are 

to: (1) Preserve and create jobs and 

promote economic recovery; (2) assist 

those most impacted by the recession; 

(3) provide investments needed to 

increase economic efficiency by 

spurring technological advances in 

science and health; (4) invest in 

transportation, environmental 

protection, and other infrastructure that 

will provide long-term economic 

benefits; and (5) stabilize State and local 

government budgets, in order to 

minimize and avoid reductions in 

essential services and 

counterproductive state and local tax 

increases. Federal departments must 

manage and expend funds made 

available through the Recovery Act to 

achieve these purposes, ‘‘including 

commencing expenditures and activities 

as quickly as possible consistent with 

prudent management.’’ (Recovery Act, 

Section 3) 

In the Recovery Act, the Congress 

appropriated $2 billion for DOE to 

provide grants to manufacturers of 

advanced battery systems and vehicle 

batteries to be produced in the United 

States, including advanced lithium ion 

batteries, hybrid electrical systems, 

component manufacturers, and software 

designers. (Recovery Act, Title IV) To 

implement this provision, DOE issued a 

financial assistance funding opportunity 

announcement on March 19, 2009, for 

the Electric Drive Vehicle Battery and 

Component Manufacturing Initiative. 

(DE–FOA–0000026) 

This initiative is critical to the 

development and production of electric 

drive vehicle systems that will 

substantially reduce petroleum 

consumption. In addition, as stated in 

the funding opportunity announcement, 

the grants will meaningfully aid in the 

nation’s economic recovery by creating 

U.S. based manufacturing jobs. 

The funding opportunity 

announcement is a competitive 

solicitation, and DOE has received more 

applications than it expects to be able to 

fund. DOE is now reviewing the merits 

of the applications in order to select 

those to which it may provide funding. 

Criterion 4 of the merit review criteria 

includes consideration of anticipated 

environmental impacts. As with 

environmental reviews under NEPA, the 

focus will be on potentially significant 

environmental impacts. As part of the 

application process, each applicant was 

required to complete an environmental 

questionnaire, which will be considered 

during the merit review. Consideration 

of potential environmental impacts will 

be facilitated by the participation of a 

DOE NEPA Compliance Officer as a 

resource to the merit review panel and 

the selection official. 

DOE’s NEPA implementing 

procedures, at 10 CFR 1021.216, 

establish a process for the consideration 

of potential environmental impacts 

prior to selection. The central element 

of this process is preparation by DOE of 

an environmental critique containing, 

among other things, a ‘‘brief 

comparative evaluation of the potential 

environmental impacts of the offers, 

which will address direct and indirect 

effects, short-term and long-term effects, 

proposed mitigation measures, adverse 

effects that cannot be avoided, areas 

where important environmental 

information is incomplete and 

unavailable, unresolved environmental 

issues and practicable mitigating 

measures not included in the offeror’s 

proposal.’’ (10 CFR 1021.216(g)(3)) This 

environmental critique forms the basis 

for an environmental synopsis, which is 

made available to the public and is 

incorporated into any environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement prepared. (10 CFR 

1021.216(h)) Another feature of the 

environmental critique is that, in 

addition to information provided by the 

applicant, ‘‘it may also evaluate 

supplemental information developed by 

DOE as necessary for a reasoned 

decision.’’ (10 CFR 1021.216(f)) This 

contrasts with the merit review process, 

which is limited to information 

provided in the application. Some other 

components of an environmental 

critique (e.g., brief discussion of the 

purpose of the funding opportunity and 

of the applicants’ proposals) repeat 

information that is already part of the 

Merit Review Report that is prepared for 

the selection official. (The Merit Review 

Report is not publicly available.) 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 122 / Friday, June 26, 2009 / Notices 30559 

1 DOE’s NEPA regulations state at 10 CFR 

1021.343(c) that the Secretary of Energy must 

provide written approval of any variance under that 

section. However, this authority has been delegated 

to the General Counsel pursuant to Department of 

Energy Delegation Order No. 00–015.00A to the 

General Counsel. 

1As noted in Western’s Notice of Intent to 

prepare a Big Stone II EIS, Western became the lead 

agency for preparation of the EIS because the 

construction of Big Stone II would incorporate a 

major new generation resource into Western’s 

Continued 

DOE’s existing NEPA regulations 

provide for certain variances ‘‘soundly 

based on the interests of national 

security or the public health, safety, or 

welfare.’’ (10 CFR 1021.343(c)) Any 

such variance must have the advance 

written approval of the General 

Counsel,1 and DOE must publish a 

notice in the Federal Register specifying 

the variance granted and the reasons. 

Variance 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 1021.343(c), I 

have determined that granting a 

variance from the requirements of 10 

CFR 1021.216(c) through (h) with 

respect to the Department’s funding 

opportunity for the Electric Drive 

Vehicle Battery and Component 

Manufacturing Initiative (DE–FOA– 

0000026) is soundly based on the 

interests of public welfare. Expediting 

the award of funding to promising 

proposals will accelerate development 

and production of electric drive 

vehicles. In addition, it will facilitate 

the nation’s economic recovery by 

creating and retaining jobs and by 

transforming the nation’s industrial 

infrastructure. 

I have concluded that the 

Department’s process for making these 

funding awards will provide the 

selecting official with sufficient 

information regarding potential 

environmental impacts in the Merit 

Review Report, which will summarize 

the strengths and weaknesses of the 

proposals according to the merit review 

criteria, including but not limited to 

environmental impacts. This report also 

will provide certain other information 

called for in 10 CFR 1021.216(g). 

This variance does not affect the 

requirements imposed by 10 CFR 

1021.216(i). If projects selected for 

funding require preparation of an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement, these 

NEPA reviews will be completed before 

DOE takes any action that would have 

an adverse environmental impact or 

limit the choice of reasonable 

alternatives. In addition, consistent with 

the openness provisions of 10 CFR 

1021.216(h), any such environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement will describe the 

environmental factors noted in the Merit 

Review Report that are relevant to the 

proposal being analyzed. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 22, 

2009. 

Scott Blake Harris, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. E9–15126 Filed 6–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Western Area Power Administration 

Construction, Operation, and 

Maintenance of the Proposed 

Transmission Agency of Northern 

California Transmission Project, 

California 

AGENCY: Western Area Power 

Administration, DOE. 

ACTION: Extension of scoping period. 

SUMMARY: On February 23, 2009, 

Western Area Power Administration 

(Western), an agency of the Department 

of Energy (DOE), announced the Notice 

of Intent to prepare an Environmental 

Impact Statement/Environmental 

Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the 

construction, operation, and 

maintenance of the proposed 

Transmission Agency of Northern 

California (TANC) Transmission Project. 

In that notice, Western described the 

schedule for scoping meetings and 

advised the public that comments on 

the scope of the EIS/EIR were due by 

April 30, 2009. On May 8, 2009, 

Western published a notice in the 

Federal Register extending the 

comment period to May 31, 2009. By 

this notice, Western extends the due 

date for comments on the scope of the 

EIS/EIR to July 30, 2009. 

DATES: The date to provide comments 

on the scope of the EIS/EIR is extended 

to July 30, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

scope of the EIS/EIR should be 

addressed to Mr. David Young, National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

Document Manager, Western Area 

Power Administration, Sierra Nevada 

Region, 114 Parkshore Drive, Folsom, 

CA 95630 or e-mail TTPEIS@wapa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information, please contact Mr. 

David Young, NEPA Document 

Manager, Western Area Power 

Administration, Sierra Nevada Region, 

114 Parkshore Drive, Folsom, CA 95630, 

telephone (916) 353–4777, fax (916) 

353–4772, or e-mail TTPEIS@wapa.gov. 

Additional information on the proposed 

Project can also be found and comments 

submitted at http://www.wapa.gov/ 

transmission/ttp.htm. For general 

information on DOE’s NEPA review 

procedures or status of a NEPA review, 

contact Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, 

Director of NEPA Policy and 

Compliance, GC–20, U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585, telephone 

(202) 586–4600 or (800) 472–2756. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

February 23, 2009, Western announced 

the Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS for 

the construction, operation, and 

maintenance of the proposed TANC 

Transmission Project (74 FR 8086). In 

that notice, Western described the 

schedule for scoping meetings for the 

EIS/EIR, and advised the public that 

comments regarding the scope of the 

EIS/EIR were due by April 30, 2009. 

Western held all public scoping 

meetings as scheduled. On May 8, 2009, 

Western published a notice in the 

Federal Register extending the 

comment period to May 31, 2009 (74 FR 

21674). Western has received requests 

for more time to comment. By this 

notice, Western further extends the due 

date for comments on the scope of the 

EIS/EIR to July 30, 2009. 

Dated: June 17, 2009. 

Harrison G. Pease, 

Chief Financial Officer. 

[FR Doc. E9–15048 Filed 6–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Western Area Power Administration 

Big Stone II Power Plant and 

Transmission Project Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/ 

EIS–0377) 

AGENCY: Western Area Power 

Administration, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of Availability. 

SUMMARY: The Western Area Power 

Administration (Western) announces 

the availability of the Big Stone II Power 

Plant and Transmission Project (Project) 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS). This Final EIS analyzes the 

environmental impacts of constructing 

and operating the proposed Project. 

Western is considering whether to grant 

a request to interconnect the proposed 

Project with Western’s transmission 

system at Morris and Granite Falls 

substations in Minnesota, an action 

which requires Western to complete 

modifications to these substations to 

support the interconnection.1 The U.S.