[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29728-29732]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12632]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and
Notice of Potential Floodplain and Wetlands Involvement for the
FutureGen 2.0 Program
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of Intent and Notice of Potential Floodplain and
Wetlands Involvement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department)
announces its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) NEPA
regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and DOE's NEPA implementing
procedures (10 CFR Part 1021) to assess the potential environmental
impacts of DOE's proposed action: providing approximately $1 billion in
Federal funding (most of it appropriated by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act, or ``ARRA'') for the FutureGen 2.0 program. DOE has
prepared this Notice of Intent (NOI) to inform interested parties of
the pending EIS and to invite public comments on the proposed action,
including: (1) The range of environmental issues, (2) the alternatives
to be analyzed, and (3) the impacts to be considered in the EIS. The
NOI also provides notice in accordance with 10 CFR Part 1022 (DOE's
regulations for compliance with floodplain and wetland review
requirements) that the proposed project may involve potential impacts
to floodplains and wetlands.
The FutureGen 2.0 program would provide financial assistance for
the repowering of an existing electricity generator with clean coal
technologies integrated with a pipeline that would transport carbon
dioxide (CO2) to a sequestration site where it would be
injected and stored in a deep geologic formation. DOE entered into
separate cooperative agreements with Ameren Energy Resources (Ameren)
and with the FutureGen Alliance (the Alliance) that define DOE's
proposed action. This program consists of an Oxy-Combustion Large Scale
Test undertaken by Ameren at its Meredosia Power Station in west
central Illinois and a Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir
undertaken by the Alliance. In addition, the Alliance would construct
and operate facilities for research, training, and visitors in the
vicinity of the sequestration site. The Alliance has identified its
preferred sequestration site in Morgan County, Illinois, and two
alternative sites, one in Christian County, Illinois and one in Douglas
County, Illinois. The program would provide performance and emissions
data as well as establish operating and maintenance experience that
would facilitate future large-scale commercial deployment of these
technologies. DOE would provide technical and programmatic guidance to
Ameren and the Alliance and oversee activities for compliance with the
terms of the cooperative agreements. DOE is responsible for NEPA
compliance activities.
DOE encourages government agencies, private-sector organizations,
and the general public to participate in the FutureGen 2.0 program
through the NEPA process. DOE will consult with interested Native
American Tribes and Federal, state, regional and local agencies during
preparation of the EIS. Further, DOE invites agencies with jurisdiction
by law or special expertise to participate as cooperating agencies in
the preparation of this EIS.
DATES: DOE invites comments on the proposed scope and content of the
EIS from all interested parties. To ensure consideration in the
preparation of the EIS, comments must be received by June 22, 2011. DOE
will consider late comments to the extent practicable. In addition to
receiving comments in writing and by e-mail [See ADDRESSES below], DOE
will conduct public scoping meetings during which government agencies,
private-sector organizations, and the general public are invited to
present oral and written comments with regard to DOE's proposed action,
alternatives, and potential impacts of the proposed FutureGen 2.0
program. DOE will consider these comments in developing the EIS. Public
scoping meetings will be held on June 7, 8, and 9, 2011 [See ``Public
Scoping Process'' under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below].
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of the EIS and requests to
participate in the public scoping meetings should be addressed to: Mr.
Cliff Whyte, U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology
Laboratory, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, West Virginia 26507-0880.
Individuals and organizations who would like to provide oral or written
comments should contact Mr. Whyte by mail at the above address;
telephone (toll-free) 1-877-338-5689; fax 304-285-4403; or electronic
mail ([email protected]).
Oral comments will be heard during the formal portion of the
scoping meetings [See ``Public Scoping Process'' under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION below]. Various displays and other information about DOE's
NEPA process and the FutureGen 2.0 program will be available, and
representatives from DOE and the project partners will be present at an
informal session to discuss the FutureGen 2.0 program and the EIS
process.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about this
project, contact Mr. Whyte as described above. For general information
about the DOE NEPA process, please 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;
telephone (202-586-4600); fax (202-586-7031); or leave a toll-free
message (1-800-472-2756).
[[Page 29729]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 27, 2003, President George W. Bush proposed that the
United States undertake a $1 billion, 10-year project to build the
world's first coal-fueled plant to produce electricity and hydrogen
with near-zero emissions. In response to that announcement, DOE
developed plans for the original FutureGen project, which would
establish the technical and economic feasibility of producing
electricity and hydrogen from coal--a low-cost and abundant energy
resource--while capturing and geologically storing the CO2
generated in the process. DOE issued a Final EIS for the original
FutureGen project (DOE/EIS-0394) in November 2007 and an associated
Record of Decision in July 2009 (74 FR 35174). The proposed action
would have resulted in the construction and operation of a 330-MWe
(gross) integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant near
Mattoon, Illinois, with capture and storage of more than 1 million tons
of CO2 per year in the Mount Simon geologic formation. The
total cost of the original FutureGen Project proved to be higher than
acceptable, however, causing a funding gap that could not be filled by
Federal or state governments or private industry. As a result DOE
refocused its approach. The FutureGen 2.0 program consists of the two
separate Cooperative Agreements with Ameren and the Alliance. Ameren's
partners include Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group (B&W) and Air
Liquide Process & Construction, Inc. (AL). The Alliance is a non-profit
corporation that represents a global coalition of coal producers, coal
users and coal equipment suppliers, including full members: Alpha
Natural Resources, Inc.; Anglo American, LLC; CONSOL Energy, Inc.;
Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Company
(LG&E and KU); Peabody Energy Corporation; Rio Tinto Energy America;
and Xstrata, PLC.
Purpose and Need for DOE Action
In pursuing the United States' goal of providing safe, affordable
and clean energy for its citizens, coal plays an important role in the
nation's energy supply. However, without carbon capture and
sequestration, the combustion of coal and other fossil fuels leads to
increased releases of CO2 into the atmosphere. Because power
plants are large stationary sources, it is generally considered to be
more feasible to capture CO2 from them and store it rather
than attempting to capture it from mobile sources such as automobiles.
To this end, DOE has sought to support near-zero emissions
technologies that would produce electric power from coal while
permanently storing CO2 in deep geologic formations. The
technical, economic, and environmental feasibility of producing
electric power from coal coupled with geologic storage technology must
be proven. DOE believes that oxy-combustion technology has the
potential to help open a market for repowering in many of the world's
existing pulverized coal power plants. In the absence of the proven
operation of a repowered, near-zero emissions plant, the contribution
of coal to the nation's energy supply could be reduced. This could
potentially increase the use of higher cost and/or nondomestic energy
resources and impact the domestic economy as well as energy security.
Proposed Action
DOE proposes to provide financial assistance (approximately $1
billion) to Ameren and the Alliance to support implementation of their
projects, which if successful would provide critical performance and
emissions data as well as establish operating, permitting, maintenance,
and other experience needed for future commercial deployment of these
technologies.
The FutureGen 2.0 program seeks to continue the work of the
original FutureGen project by advancing technology that can make the
United States a world leader in carbon capture and storage (CCS). In
formulating its proposal for FutureGen 2.0, DOE sought to reduce the
project's overall cost by changing the technology from coal
gasification to oxy-combustion. The inherent scalability of oxy-
combustion technology allows a reduction in power plant size with
substantial cost benefits. Studies by DOE's National Energy Technology
Laboratory have identified oxy-combustion technology as a potentially
cost-effective approach to implement carbon capture at existing coal-
fueled facilities. It also has the potential for use in new power
plants as well as in repowering a large cross-section of the world's
existing pulverized coal plants.
The FutureGen 2.0 program would proceed through 2020 with design,
construction, operation, and monitoring. Performance and economic test
results would be shared among all participants, industry, the
environmental community, and the public. The Alliance has an open
membership policy to encourage the addition of other coal producers,
coal users and coal equipment suppliers, both domestic and
international. Consistent with the original FutureGen project, DOE
encourages participation from international organizations to maximize
the global applicability and acceptance of FutureGen 2.0's results,
helping to support an international consensus on the role of coal and
geologic storage in addressing global greenhouse gas emissions and
energy security.
Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test
For the Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test, Ameren and its team would
repower Unit 4 at Ameren's Meredosia Power Station in west central
Illinois using advanced oxy-combustion technology. The oxy-combustion
facility may be capable of running on a range of coals and operating
conditions. The data generated would be used to expand the market for
oxy-combustion technology. The project is also expected to provide
performance and emissions data as well as establish operating and
maintenance experience that will facilitate future large-scale
commercial projects.
The scope of this test includes project definition, design,
procurement, manufacture, installation, startup, commercial operation
and testing of an integrated oxy-combustion coal boiler with
CO2 capture, purification, and compression. The plant would
generate approximately 200 MWe gross with a net output estimated at
approximately 140 MWe. The CO2 would be cleaned, compressed
for transport, and delivered to a terminal point for transfer to the
Alliance's project.
Meredosia Power Station: The Meredosia Power Station is located
adjacent to the east side of the Illinois River, south of Meredosia,
Illinois, approximately 18 miles west of Jacksonville, Illinois. The
plant includes four generating units, three of which are coal-fired and
one of which is oil-fired. Unit 4, built in 1975, is an oil-fired unit
that is currently idle. The steam turbine and generator have low
operating hours and could be placed into service as part of the
repowered oxy-combustion design. The station contains existing
infrastructure that could support the operation of the oxy-combustion
system including interconnection to the electrical grid, water supply
and intake structures, wastewater outfalls, coal storage and handling
areas, and barge and truck delivery systems for coal. The 5,300-foot
western boundary of the 260-acre Meredosia Power Station fronts the
Illinois River, where the station's oil and coal barge unloading
facilities are located. The land immediately adjacent to the station on
the north, northeast and southeast is railroad property; other
[[Page 29730]]
immediately adjacent property is roadway. Beyond and in addition to the
railroad property and roadways, land use is primarily residential to
the north and northeast, scattered residential and agricultural to the
east, and industrial to the south.
Oxy-Combustion Technology: This technology involves designing the
power plant's boiler to combust coal with a mixture of nearly pure
oxygen and recycled flue gas (which is primarily CO2) rather
than air. An air separation unit produces the oxygen. The concentrated
stream of CO2 that leaves the boiler would be ready for
processing by environmental cleanup equipment (to remove other captured
emissions) and the compression and purification unit. The concentrated
and compressed CO2 would then be transferred to a pipeline
for transmission to the Alliance's storage location. The oxy-combustion
technology during normal operations would produce near-zero emissions
of oxides of nitrogen (NOX), oxides of sulfur (SOx),
mercury, particulate matter and other pollutants typical of a
conventional coal-fired boiler. The plant would be designed to capture
approximately 1.3 million metric tons of CO2 per year from
the oxy-combustion system and is targeted to achieve a CO2
capture rate exceeding 90 percent.
Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir
For the Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir project, the
Alliance would design, construct, and operate a transmission pipeline
and geologic injection and storage facility. The Alliance's work
involves selection of a suitable storage site, development of the
subsurface storage field, development of CO2 transport
infrastructure (pipeline), and construction of the associated research
and training facilities, including a visitor center. The Alliance has
identified its preferred site in Morgan County, Illinois, for the
injection facility, and two other sites (one in Christian County and
one in Douglas County, Illinois) as potential alternate locations
should the preferred site prove infeasible. The Alliance's preferred
site for geologic storage in Morgan County, Illinois is approximately
30 miles from the Meredosia Power Station, and the Alliance's alternate
sites in Christian County and Douglas County, Illinois are
approximately 75 and 125 miles from the plant site, respectively. All
three sites would be evaluated in the EIS unless DOE determines that
they are not reasonable alternatives.
The Alliance would construct a pipeline to transport CO2
from the Meredosia Power Station to the selected storage site where it
would be injected through deep wells into the target geologic
formation. The pipeline and storage reservoir would be designed to
inject and store approximately 39 million metric tons over a 30-year
operating period. Depending on stakeholder and landowner acceptance,
the Alliance may also consider other sources of CO2 in
addition to that from Ameren's plant for injection. Research would
include site characterization, injection and storage, and
CO2 monitoring and measurement.
The target formation for CO2 injection and storage is
the Mount Simon sandstone formation, which is one of the Illinois
Basin's major deep saline formations. The formation's positive
characteristics for CO2 storage include its isolation from
other strata, as well as its depth, lateral continuity, and relative
permeability. The Mount Simon is bounded below by a Pre-Cambrian
igneous rock and above by the Eau Claire formation, which is a mixture
of tightly layered shales with low permeability, as well as by
secondary caprock formations above the Eau Claire. The Alliance would
implement a monitoring, verification, and accounting (MVA) program to
monitor the injection and storage of CO2 within the geologic
formations to verify that it stays within the target formation. The MVA
program would meet injection control permitting and requirements that
DOE may impose. In accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act, the
Alliance would be required to obtain a Class VI underground injection
control permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The MVA
program consists of the following components: (1) Injection system
monitoring; (2) containment monitoring (via monitoring wells,
mechanical integrity testing, and other means); (3) CO2
plume tracking via multiple techniques; (4) CO2 injection
simulation modeling; and (5) perhaps new experimental techniques not
yet in practice.
Proposed Project Schedules
The Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test would initiate operations
(including CO2 capture, purification and compression) in
2016 and complete federally-funded project activities (operational
testing) in 2018. The Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir
would become operational at the same time (2016) and complete
federally-funded project activities (operational testing and two-years
of additional federally-funded MVA activities) in 2020. CO2
capture, pipeline transport, injection, and MVA activities are expected
to operate (without federal funding) for approximately 30 years. MVA
activities would take place during injection and continue beyond its
cessation as prescribed by regulatory requirements. The schedule is
contingent upon Ameren and the Alliance receiving the necessary permits
and regulatory approvals, as well as financial closing on all the
necessary funding sources, including DOE's financial assistance. DOE's
proposal to provide full financial assistance for detailed design,
procurement of equipment, construction, and operations is contingent
upon DOE's completion of the NEPA process, and achievement of the
permitting and financial requirements listed above by Ameren and the
Alliance.
Connected and Cumulative Actions
The components of the FutureGen 2.0 program will be evaluated
individually and collectively within the EIS. Although injection of
other sources of CO2 is not currently proposed, such
injection is reasonably foreseeable and will be evaluated in the EIS.
DOE will also consider the cumulative impacts of the program, which
will include the analysis of emissions (including greenhouse gas
emissions) and other incremental impacts. Cumulative impacts are
impacts on the environment which result from the incremental impacts of
an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
future actions.
Alternatives
NEPA requires that an EIS evaluate the range of reasonable
alternatives to an agency's proposed action. DOE's range of reasonable
alternatives includes the No Action Alternative, which is to withhold
financial assistance for the FutureGen 2.0 program, and the Action
Alternative, which is to provide financial assistance to the FutureGen
2.0 program.
DOE has developed the range of reasonable alternatives for
FutureGen 2.0 program based on evaluation of various clean coal
technologies through the Clean Coal Power Initiative program; analysis
of the original FutureGen Project in terms of technology, costs, and
suitability for geologic storage; data obtained and reviewed through
various funding opportunity announcements; data obtained for the
original FutureGen Project and a related project called Restructured
FutureGen; and the interest of industry to participate in projects to
support FutureGen 2.0 based on these evaluations. In particular, DOE's
current proposal to advance the programmatic goal of CO2
storage in the
[[Page 29731]]
Mount Simon Formation in Illinois through the FutureGen Program was
addressed in its Final Environmental Impact Statement for the FutureGen
Project (DOE/EIS-0394 [November 2007]) and associated Record of
Decision (74 FR 35174 (2009)).
Through review and consideration of these data and analysis, the
repowering of an existing power plant with oxy-combustion technology
was identified as the approach that would meet cost and technology
advancement objectives of FutureGen Program. Furthermore, DOE
determined that due to cost and technical advantages obtained through
efforts conducted by the FutureGen Alliance under the original
FutureGen Project, that the Alliance's choice of geologic storage
formations would be limited to the Mount Simon Formation. Given these
factors, reasonable alternatives were limited to potential oxy-
combustion repowering projects at a location from which it would remain
economically viable to transport captured CO2 for injection
into the Mount Simon Formation.
The range of reasonable alternatives for a financial assistance
project that is proposed by industrial participants is limited to the
alternatives or project options under consideration by the participants
or that are reasonable within the confines of the project as proposed
(e.g., the particular location of the processing units, pipelines,
injection sites on land proposed for the project, and potential
measures to mitigate potential environmental impacts) and a ``no-
action'' alternative. Regarding the no action alternative, DOE assumes
for purposes of the EIS that, if DOE decides to withhold financial
assistance, the project would not proceed.
DOE will evaluate the two projects that constitute the FutureGen
2.0 program with and without any mitigating conditions that DOE may
identify as reasonable and appropriate. Alternatives considered in
developing respective components of the proposed FutureGen 2.0 program
and eliminated from further consideration will also be discussed in the
EIS.
The sequestration site would be designed to accept and store at a
minimum the CO2 captured at Ameren's Meredosia Power Station
over its 30-year design life. The Alliance undertook a site selection
process in October 2010 with the issuance of a Request for Proposals
seeking a site upon which the Alliance would construct and operate the
CO2 storage project. The Alliance hosted two public
meetings, one for prospective site offerors and a subsequent meeting
for the general public, on October 28, 2010, in Springfield, Illinois.
Representatives for 16 proposed sites attended the meeting, and the
Alliance received proposals from six sites in November 2010. In
December 2010, the Alliance selected four of the six sites for further
evaluation and subsequently identified three candidate sites, one
preferred and two alternates, which will be evaluated in the EIS.
DOE will also consider a no-action alternative whereby the
Department would not fund the FutureGen 2.0 program and the project
would not proceed. In the absence of DOE funding, it would be unlikely
that the project proponents, or industry in general, would soon
undertake the utility-scale integration of CO2 capture and
geologic storage with a coal-fired power plant repowered with oxy-
combustion. Absent DOE's investment in a utility-scale facility, the
development of oxy-combustion repowered plants integrated with
CO2 capture and geologic storage would occur more slowly or
not at all.
Decision Making Process
DOE will consider public scoping comments in preparing a Draft EIS,
which will be issued for public comment. DOE will consider public
comments on the Draft EIS and respond as appropriate in the Final EIS.
No sooner than 30 days following completion of the Final EIS, DOE would
announce its decision regarding whether to provide financial assistance
to these projects in a Record of Decision (ROD). If DOE decides to
provide financial assistance, the Alliance would develop its pipeline
and storage site. Similarly, Ameren would proceed with detailed design
and construction activities at the Meredosia site.
Floodplains and Wetlands
Activities required to implement the FutureGen 2.0 program, such as
those required to repower Unit 4 at the Meredosia Power Station, would
be undertaken to avoid or minimize potential impacts to wetlands or
floodplains. The Meredosia Power Station site includes low lying areas
to the west, north, and south, which are located in the floodplain.
However, the existing generating units as well as proposed locations
for the new oxy-combustion unit are located above the floodplain
elevation. Any wetland and floodplain impacts that might result from
installation of monitoring and injection wells, or the construction of
CO2 pipelines or other linear features required for this
program, will be described in the EIS. In the event that DOE were to
identify wetlands and floodplains that would be affected by the
FutureGen 2.0 program as a result of pipelines, injection facilities,
or connected actions, DOE would prepare a floodplain and wetland
assessment in accordance with its regulations at 10 CFR Part 1022, and
include the assessment in the Draft EIS.
Preliminary Identification of Environmental Issues
DOE intends to address the issues listed below when considering the
potential impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the
proposed FutureGen 2.0 program and any connected actions. This list is
neither intended to be all-inclusive, nor a predetermined set of
potential impacts. DOE invites comments on whether this is an
appropriate list of issues that should be considered in the EIS. The
preliminary list of potentially affected resources or activities and
their related environmental issues includes:
Air quality resources: Potential air quality impacts from emissions
during construction and operation of the repowered Unit 4 at the
Meredosia plant or CCS facilities and other related facilities on local
or regional air quality;
Climate change: Potential impacts from emissions of CO2
and other greenhouse gas emissions;
Water resources: Potential impacts from water utilization and
consumption, plus potential impacts from stream crossings and
wastewater discharges;
Infrastructure and land use: Potential environmental and
socioeconomic impacts associated with the project, including delivery
of feed materials and distribution of products (e.g., access roads,
pipelines);
Visual resources: Potential impacts to the view shed, scenic views
(e.g., impacts from the injection wells, pipelines, and support
facilities for the injection wells and pipelines), and perception of
the community or locality;
Solid wastes: Pollution prevention and waste management issues
(generation, treatment, transport, storage, disposal or use), including
potential impacts from the generation, treatment, storage, and
management of hazardous materials and other solid wastes;
Biological resources: Potential impacts to vegetation, wildlife,
threatened or endangered species, and ecologically sensitive habitats;
Floodplains and wetlands: Potential wetland and floodplain impacts
from construction of project facilities;
Traffic: Potential impacts from the construction and operation of
the facilities, including changes in local traffic patterns,
deterioration of roads, traffic hazards, and traffic controls;
[[Page 29732]]
Historic and cultural resources: Potential impacts related to site
development and the associated linear facilities (e.g., pipelines);
Geology: Potential impacts from the injection and storage of
CO2 on underground resources such as ground water supplies,
mineral resources, and fossil fuel resources, and the fate and
stability of CO2 being stored;
Health and safety issues: Potential impacts associated with use,
transport, and storage of hazardous chemicals, as well as
CO2 capture and transport to the sequestration site;
Socioeconomics: Potential impacts to schools, housing, public
services, and local revenues, including the creation of jobs;
Environmental justice: Potential for disproportionately high and
adverse impacts on minority and low-income populations;
Noise and light: Potential disturbance impacts from construction,
transportation of materials, and facility operations;
Connected actions: Potential impacts from the integrated operations
of the oxy-combustion project and sequestration project, as well as
potential development of support facilities or supporting
infrastructure;
Cumulative effects that could result from the incremental impacts
of the proposed project when added to other past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable future actions;
DOE will also address compliance with regulatory and environmental
permitting requirements and environmental monitoring plans associated
with the carbon capture facility and CO2 geologic storage
activities.
Public Scoping Process
This Notice of Intent initiates the scoping process under NEPA,
which will guide the development of the Draft EIS. To ensure
identification of issues related to DOE's proposed action with respect
to the proposed FutureGen 2.0 program, DOE seeks public input to define
the scope of the EIS. The public scoping period will end June 22, 2011.
Interested government agencies, Native American Tribes, private-sector
organizations, and the general public are encouraged to submit comments
or suggestions concerning the content of the EIS, issues and impacts
that should be addressed, and alternatives that should be considered.
Scoping comments should clearly describe specific issues or topics that
the EIS should address. Written, e-mailed, or faxed comments should be
received by June 22, 2011 (see ADDRESSES). DOE will consider late
comments to the extent practicable.
DOE will conduct public scoping meetings according to the following
schedule:
June 7, 2011--Taylorville High School, 815 W. Springfield Road,
Taylorville, IL 62568.
June 8, 2011--Ironhorse Golf Club, 2000 Ironhorse Drive, Tuscola, IL
61953.
June 9, 2011--The Jacksonville Elks Lodge, 231 West Morgan Street,
Jacksonville, IL 62650.
Each public scoping meeting will include an informal session from 5
to 7 p.m, followed by a formal presentation at 7 p.m.
Oral comments will be heard during the formal portion of the
scoping meetings. The public is also invited to learn more about the
project at an informal session at each location. DOE requests that
anyone who wishes to speak at the public scoping meetings should
contact Mr. Whyte, either by phone, e-mail, fax, or postal mail (see
ADDRESSES).
Those who do not arrange in advance to speak may register at the
meeting (preferably at the beginning of the meeting) and would be given
an opportunity to speak after previously scheduled speakers. Speakers
will be given approximately five minutes to present their comments.
Those speakers who want more than five minutes should indicate the
length of time desired in their request. Depending on the number of
speakers, DOE may need to limit all speakers to five minutes initially
and provide additional opportunity as time permits. Individuals may
also provide written materials in lieu of, or supplemental to, their
presentations. DOE will give equal consideration to oral and written
comments.
DOE will begin the formal meeting with an overview of the proposed
FutureGen 2.0 program. The meeting will not be conducted as an
evidentiary hearing, and speakers will not be cross-examined. However,
speakers may be asked questions to help ensure that DOE fully
understands the comments or suggestions. A presiding officer will
establish the order of speakers and provide any additional procedures
necessary to conduct the meeting. A stenographer will record the
proceedings, including all oral comments received.
Issued in Washington, DC, this 18th day of May 2011.
Charles D. McConnell,
Chief Operating Officer, Office of Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-12632 Filed 5-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P