22 March 2011

Texas Poly-generation Coal Gasification Project

[Federal Register: March 22, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 55)]
[Notices]               
[Page 15968-15970]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22mr11-72]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

 
Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement and Public Hearing Notice for the Texas Clean Energy Project, 
near Odessa, Ector County, TX

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Availability and Public Hearing.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces the availability 
of the Texas Clean Energy Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement 
(DOE/EIS-0444D) for public review and comment, as well as the date, 
location, and time for a public hearing. The draft environmental impact 
statement (EIS) analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated 
with the Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP), which would be constructed 
and operated by Summit Texas Clean Energy, LLC, an affiliate of Summit 
Power Group, Inc. (Summit). Summit's proposal was selected by DOE to 
receive financial assistance under the Clean Coal Power Initiative 
(CCPI) program.
    DOE prepared this draft EIS in accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the

[[Page 15969]]

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations that implement the 
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and the DOE 
procedures implementing NEPA (10 CFR part 1021).

DATES: DOE invites the public to comment on the draft EIS during the 
public comment period, which ends May 2, 2011. DOE will consider all 
comments postmarked or received during the public comment period in 
preparing the final EIS and will consider late comments to the extent 
practicable.
    DOE will hold a public hearing on April 5, 2011, in Odessa, Texas. 
An informational session will be held from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m., preceding 
the formal presentations and formal comment period from 7 p.m. to 
approximately 9 p.m. See the Public Hearing section for details on the 
hearing process and locations.

ADDRESSES: Requests for information about this draft EIS and requests 
to receive a copy of it should be directed to: Mr. Mark L. McKoy, 
Environmental Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy 
Technology Laboratory, M/S B07, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, WV 26507-
0880. Additional information about the draft EIS may also be requested 
by electronic mail at: mmckoy@netl.doe.gov or by telephone: (304) 285-
4426, or toll-free at: (800) 432-8330, extension 4426. The draft EIS 
will be available at: http://nepa.energy.gov/. Copies of the draft EIS 
are also available for review at the locations listed in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this Notice.
    Written comments on the draft EIS can be mailed to Mr. Mark L. 
McKoy, Environmental Manager, at the address noted above. Written 
comments may also be submitted by fax to: (304) 285-4403, or submitted 
electronically to: mmckoy@netl.doe.gov. Oral comments on the draft EIS 
will be accepted verbatim only during the public hearing scheduled for 
the date and location provided in the DATES section of this Notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the 
proposed project or the draft EIS, please contact Mr. Mark L. McKoy 
(see ADDRESSES). For general information regarding 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 20585-0103; telephone: (202) 
586-4600; fax: (202) 586-7031; or leave a message at: (800) 472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to provide limited financial 
assistance (approximately $450 million), through a cooperative 
agreement, to Summit for the proposed TCEP. The project proponent team 
includes: Summit; Blue Source, LLC; Siemens, AG; Linde AG (operating 
through Selas Fluid Processing, Corp.); Fluor Corporation; and CW 
NextGen, Inc.
    The TCEP would use coal-fueled integrated gasification combined-
cycle technology to generate electric power and would capture carbon 
dioxide (CO2) for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and 
eventual sequestration. The plant would generate 400 megawatts (gross) 
of electricity, of which approximately 213 megawatts would be provided 
to the power grid. It would also produce urea, argon, and sulfuric acid 
for sale in commercial markets. Because of its multiple production 
capabilities, the plant is referred to as a poly-generation (or 
polygen) plant. DOE would provide approximately 26 percent of the $1.73 
billion (rounded-2009 dollars) in development and capital costs 
recognized under the DOE cooperative agreement.
    The polygen plant would be built on a 600 acre oil field site in 
Ector County, Texas, north of the abandoned oil town of Penwell. Summit 
would design and construct the plant to capture approximately 90 
percent of its CO2. During the demonstration phase of the 
plant's operations, the project would sequester about 3 million tons of 
CO2 per year by transporting it in pipelines to existing oil 
fields in the Permian Basin of West Texas for use in EOR operations 
by third-party buyers of the CO2. Following the demonstration phase, 
the polygen plant would continue in commercial operation for 30 to 
50 years and would continue to capture its CO2.

______

Inserts by Cryptome from the Draft EIS for the Texas Clean Energy Project:

http://nepa.energy.gov/documents/EIS-0444D_Chapter2_ProposedActionandAlternatives.pdf

EOR refers to techniques that allow increased recovery of oil in partially 
depleted or high viscosity oil fields. CO2 flooding (CO2 EOR) has the 
potential to not only increase the yield of residual or high viscosity oil, 
but also to sequester CO2 that would normally be released to the atmosphere.
In general terms, CO2 is injected into an oil field through injection wells 
drilled near producing wells. The CO2 and oil mix together and form a mixture 
that more easily flows to the production well. To sweep out residual oil, 
CO2 is cycled through the oil field one or more times, with each cycle 
resulting in a part of the CO2 becoming trapped in the spaces that were 
previously occupied by oil. The CO2 that comes up the well with the oil 
is recovered and re-injected into the field. Maturing oil fields and rising 
oil prices have made this method of resource recovery increasingly attractive 
to industry. Currently, CO2 EOR comprises approximately 37 percent of all 
EOR being performed in the United States (water is also used). The United 
States has been a leader in developing and using technologies for CO2 EOR 
by performing approximately 96 percent of worldwide CO2 EOR. CO2 EOR has 
been used by the oil and gas industry for more than 40 years, but only 
recently has its potential as a CO2 sequestration method been realized 
and investigated. The CO2 used to increase oil production is an expensive 
commodity, and for this reason, oil companies are highly motivated to 
ensure that CO2 does not escape to the atmosphere.



End inserts.
______

    The draft EIS evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed 
project, connected actions, and reasonable alternatives. Because the 
proposed project may affect wetlands, the draft EIS includes an 
assessment of impacts to wetlands in accordance with DOE regulations 
for Compliance with Floodplains and Wetlands Environmental Review 
Requirements (10 CFR part 1022).
    DOE analyzed two alternatives in the draft EIS, the Proposed Action 
and the No Action Alternative. Under the Proposed Action, DOE would 
provide approximately $450 million in cost-shared funding under the 
CCPI program to the proposed project. DOE has already provided a 
portion of the total funding ($23.2 million) to Summit for DOE's share 
of the preliminary design and project definition.
    Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide continued 
funding under the CCPI Program. In the absence of DOE funding, Summit 
could pursue two options. First, the facility and supporting 
infrastructure could be built as proposed without DOE funding. The 
potential environmental impacts of this option would be essentially the 
same as the Proposed Action. Second, Summit could choose to cancel the 
project, and none of the proposed facilities would be built. This 
option would not contribute to the goal of the CCPI program, which is 
to accelerate commercial deployment of advanced coal technologies with 
carbon capture and sequestration that provide the United States with 
clean, reliable, and affordable energy. For purposes of this draft EIS, 
DOE assumes that the project would not be built under the No Action 
Alternative.
    DOE has developed an overall strategy for compliance with NEPA for 
the CCPI program consistent with CEQ regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-
1508) and DOE regulations (10 CFR part 1021). This strategy has two 
phases. The first phase involves an open solicitation and competitive 
selection process to obtain a set of projects that best meets program 
needs. The applications that meet the mandatory eligibility 
requirements constitute the range of reasonable alternatives available 
to DOE to meet the program's purpose and needs. Following reviews by 
technical, environmental, and financial panels and a comprehensive 
assessment by a merit review board, DOE officials select those projects 
that they conclude best meets the program's purposes and needs. By 
broadly soliciting proposals to meet the programmatic purposes and 
needs for DOE action and by evaluating the potential environmental 
impacts associated with each proposal before selecting projects that 
would go forward to the second phase, DOE considers a reasonable range 
of alternatives for implementing CCPI. The second phase consists of 
preparing detailed NEPA analyses for each selected project. For the 
TCEP, DOE determined that providing financial assistance to the 
proposed project would constitute a major federal action that may 
significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, 
DOE has prepared this draft EIS to assess the potential environmental 
impacts of Summit's proposed project and the options that are still 
under consideration by Summit.
    Alternative sites considered by Summit in developing the proposed

[[Page 15970]]

project are presented in the EIS. Alternative sources of water supply 
and reasonable alternative routes for linear facilities are addressed 
as options in the draft EIS.
    The draft EIS considers the environmental consequences that may 
result from the proposed project and describes additional mitigation 
that might be used to reduce various impacts. Potential impacts 
identified during the scoping process and analyzed in the draft EIS 
relate to the following:
    Air quality; soils, geology, and mineral resources; ground water; 
surface water; biological resources; aesthetics; cultural resources; 
land use; socioeconomics; environmental justice; community services; 
utility systems; transportation; materials and waste management; human 
health, safety, and accidents; and noise and vibration.

Availability of the Draft EIS

    Copies of the draft EIS have been distributed to Members of 
Congress; Native American tribal governments; Federal, State, and local 
officials; and agencies, organizations, and individuals who may be 
interested or affected. The draft EIS will be available on the Internet 
at: http://nepa.energy.gov/. Copies of the draft EIS are available for 
public review at the following location: University of Texas of the 
Permian Basin, J. Conrad Dunagan Library, Main Floor, 4901 E. 
University Avenue, Odessa, TX 79762-0001. Additional copies also can be 
requested (see ADDRESSES).

Public Hearing

    DOE will conduct a public hearing on April 5, 2011 at the MCM 
Elegante Hotel, 5200 E. University Boulevard, Odessa, TX 79762 to 
obtain comments on the draft EIS. Requests to speak at the public 
hearing can be made by calling or writing to Mr. Mark L. McKoy (see 
ADDRESSES). Requests to speak that have not been submitted prior to the 
hearing will be accepted in the order in which they are received during 
the hearing. Speakers are encouraged to provide a written version of 
their oral comments or supplementary materials for the record. Each 
speaker will be allowed approximately five minutes to present 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 opportunities as time permits. Comments will be 
recorded by a court reporter and will become part of the public record. 
Oral and written comments will be given equal consideration.
    The hearing will begin at 4 p.m. with an informational session. 
Formal presentations and a formal comment session will begin at 
approximately 7 p.m. DOE will begin the hearing's formal session with 
overviews of the DOE program, proposed project, and NEPA process, 
followed by oral statements by the pre-registered speakers. Speakers 
may be asked questions to help ensure that DOE fully understands the 
comments. A presiding officer will establish the order of speakers and 
provide any additional procedures necessary to conduct the meetings.
    All meetings will be accessible to people with disabilities. In 
addition, any individual needing specific assistance, such as a sign 
language interpreter or a translator, should contact Mr. Mark L. McKoy 
(See ADDRESSES) at least 48 hours in advance of the hearing so that 
arrangements can be made.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 17, 2011.
Mark J. Matarrese,
Director, Office of Environment, Security, Safety & Health, Office of 
Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-6694 Filed 3-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P