Docstoc

Record of Decision for the Orlando Gasification Project - U.S.

Document Sample
Record of Decision for the Orlando Gasification Project - U.S. Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                           Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 66 / Friday, April 6, 2007 / Notices                                              17143

                                           c. Submission of Paper Applications                   Act (GPRA) performance measures for                   following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/
                                         by Hand Delivery.                                       this program and report those data to                 fedregister.
                                           If you submit your application in                     the Department in your interim                           To use PDF you must have Adobe
                                         paper format by hand delivery, you (or                  performance report and final                          Acrobat Reader, which is available free
                                         a courier service) must deliver the                     performance report. At the end of your                at this site. If you have questions about
                                         original and two copies of your                         project period, you must submit a final               using PDF, call the U.S. Government
                                         application by hand, on or before the                   performance report, including financial               Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1–
                                         application deadline date, to the                       information, as directed by the                       888–293–6498; or in the Washington,
                                         Department at the following address:                    Secretary. You must also submit an                    DC, area at (202) 512–1530.
                                         U.S. Department of Education,                           interim report nine months after the                     You may also view this document in
                                         Application Control Center, Attention:                  award date. This report should provide                text or PDF at the following site:
                                         (CFDA Number 84.184E), 550 12th                         the most current performance and                      http://www.ed.gov/programs/
                                         Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center                  financial expenditure information as                  dvpemergencyresponse/index.html
                                         Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–4260.                       specified by the Secretary in 34 CFR                     Note: The official version of this document
                                           The Application Control Center                        75.118. We may also require more                      is the document published in the Federal
                                         accepts hand deliveries daily between 8                 frequent performance reports in                       Register. Free Internet access to the official
                                         a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC                      accordance with 34 CFR 75.720(c).                     edition of the Federal Register and the Code
                                         time, except Saturdays, Sundays, and                       4. Performance Measures: We have                   of Federal Regulations is available on GPO
                                         Federal holidays.                                       identified the following key GPRA                     Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/
                                                                                                 performance measures for assessing the                index.html.
                                            Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper
                                         Applications: If you mail or hand deliver               effectiveness of the Readiness and
                                                                                                 Emergency Management for Schools                        Dated: April 3, 2007.
                                         your application to the Department—
                                            (1) You must indicate on the envelope                grant program: (1) The percentage of                  Deborah A. Price,
                                         and—if not provided by the Department—in                Emergency Management Grant sites that                 Assistant Deputy Secretary for Safe and Drug-
                                         Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number,                  demonstrate they have increased the                   Free Schools.
                                         including suffix letter, if any, of the                 number of hazards addressed by the                    [FR Doc. E7–6503 Filed 4–5–07; 8:45 am]
                                         competition under which you are submitting              improved school emergency                             BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
                                         your application; and
                                            (2) The Application Control Center will
                                                                                                 management plan as compared to the
                                         mail to you a notification of receipt of your           baseline plan; (2) The percentage of
                                         grant application. If you do not receive this           Emergency Management Grant sites that                 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
                                         notification within 15 business days from the           demonstrate improved knowledge of
                                         application deadline date, you should call              school/and or district emergency                      Record of Decision, Orlando
                                         the U.S. Department of Education                        management policies and procedures by                 Gasification Project, Orlando, Orange
                                         Application Control Center at (202) 245–                school staff with responsibility for                  County, FL
                                         6288.                                                   emergency management functions; and                   AGENCY:    Department of Energy.
                                                                                                 (3) The percentage of Emergency
                                         V. Application Review Information                       Management Grant sites that have a plan               ACTION:   Record of Decision.
                                           1. Selection Criteria: The selection                  for, and commitment to, the                           SUMMARY:    The Department of Energy
                                         criteria for this program are from 34 CFR               sustainability and continuous                         (DOE) has prepared an environmental
                                         75.210 and are listed in the application                improvement of the school emergency                   impact statement (EIS) (DOE/EIS–0383)
                                         package.                                                management plan by the district and                   to assess the environmental impacts
                                         VI. Award Administration Information                    community partners beyond the period                  associated with a proposed project that
                                                                                                 of Federal financial assistance.                      would be cost-shared by DOE and
                                            1. Award Notices: If your application
                                                                                                 VII. Agency Contact                                   Southern Company (in partnership with
                                         is successful, we notify your U.S.
                                                                                                                                                       the Orlando Utilities Commission)
                                         Representative and U.S. Senators and                       For Further Information Contact: Sara
                                                                                                                                                       (OUC) under DOE’s Clean Coal Power
                                         send you a Grant Award Notification                     Strizzi, U.S. Department of Education,
                                                                                                                                                       Initiative (CCPI) program. The project
                                         (GAN). We may also notify you                           400 Maryland Ave., SW., room 3E320,
                                                                                                                                                       would demonstrate advanced power
                                         informally.                                             Washington, DC 20202–6450.
                                            If your application is not evaluated or                                                                    generation systems using Integrated
                                                                                                 Telephone: (202) 708–4850 or by e-mail:
                                         not selected for funding, we notify you.                                                                      Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
                                                                                                 sara.strizzi@ed.gov.
                                            2. Administrative and National Policy                                                                      technology at OUC’s existing Stanton
                                                                                                    If you use a telecommunications
                                         Requirements: We identify                                                                                     Energy Center near Orlando, Florida.
                                                                                                 device for the deaf (TDD), you may call
                                         administrative and national policy                                                                            After careful consideration of the
                                                                                                 the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1–
                                         requirements in the application package                                                                       potential environmental impacts, along
                                                                                                 800–877–8339.
                                         and reference these and other                              Individuals with disabilities may                  with program goals and objectives, DOE
                                         requirements in the Applicable                          obtain this document in an alternative                has decided that it will provide, through
                                         Regulations section of this notice.                     format (e.g., Braille, large print,                   a cooperative agreement with Southern
                                            We reference the regulations outlining               audiotape, or computer diskette) on                   Company, a total of $235 million in
                                         the terms and conditions of an award in                 request to the program contact person                 cost-shared funding (about 41% of the
                                         the Applicable Regulations section of                   listed in this section.                               total cost of approximately $569
                                         this notice and include these and other                                                                       million) to design, construct, and
                                         specific conditions in the GAN. The                     VIII. Other Information                               demonstrate the Orlando Gasification
                                         GAN also incorporates your approved                        Electronic Access to This Document:                Project proposed by Southern Company.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES




                                         application as part of your binding                     You may view this document, as well as                ADDRESSES: The final EIS is available on
                                         commitments under the grant.                            all other documents of this Department                the DOE NEPA Web site at http://
                                            3. Reporting: If funded, you are                     published in the Federal Register, in                 www.eh.doe.gov/nepa/
                                         expected to collect data on the key                     text or Adobe Portable Document                       documentspub.html and on the DOE
                                         Government Performance and Results                      Format (PDF) on the Internet at the                   National Energy Technology Laboratory


                                    VerDate Aug<31>2005   18:39 Apr 05, 2007   Jkt 211001   PO 00000   Frm 00053   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\06APN1.SGM   06APN1
                                         17144                             Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 66 / Friday, April 6, 2007 / Notices

                                         Web site at http://www.netl.doe.gov/                    Orlando Gasification Project (‘‘Orlando               EIS Process
                                         technologies/coalpower/cctc/EIS/                        Project’’) was one of four projects                      On August 11, 2005, DOE published
                                         eis_orlando.html, and the Record of                     selected in October 2004 for further                  in the Federal Register (70 FR 46825) a
                                         Decision (ROD) will be available on                     consideration. Evaluation criteria used               Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare the EIS
                                         both Web sites in the near future. Copies               in the selection process included                     and hold a public scoping meeting. DOE
                                         of the final EIS and this ROD may be                    technical merit of the proposed                       held a public scoping meeting in
                                         requested by contacting Mr. Richard A.                  technology, potential for a successful                Orlando, Florida, on August 30, 2005.
                                         Hargis, Jr., National Environmental                     demonstration of the technology, and                  DOE received 11 oral responses at the
                                         Policy Act (NEPA) Document Manager,                     potential for the technology to be                    public scoping meeting and 11
                                         U.S. Department of Energy, National                     commercialized. DOE also considered                   responses by comment card, mail, e-
                                         Energy Technology Laboratory, 626                       the participant’s funding and financial               mail, and telephone from members of
                                         Cochrans Mill Road, P.O. Box 10940,                     proposal; DOE budget constraints;                     the public, interested groups, and
                                         Pittsburgh, PA 15236–0940; telephone:                   environmental, health, and safety                     Federal, state, and local officials. The
                                         412–386–6065; or e-mail:                                implications; and program policy                      responses assisted in establishing
                                         Richard.Hargis@netl.doe.gov.                            factors, such as DOE’s preference for                 additional issues to be analyzed in the
                                         FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To                     projects that represent a diversity of                EIS and in determining the level of
                                         obtain additional information about the                 technologies, utilize a broad range of                analysis warranted for each issue.
                                         project or the EIS, contact Mr. Richard                 U.S. coals, and represent a broad                        On August 24, 2006, DOE published
                                         A. Hargis, Jr., National Environmental                  geographical cross-section of the United              in the Federal Register (71 FR 50051) a
                                         Policy Act (NEPA) Document Manager,                     States.                                               Notice of Availability for the Orlando
                                         U.S. Department of Energy, National                                                                           Gasification Project draft EIS. The
                                                                                                    DOE selected the Orlando Project for
                                         Energy Technology Laboratory, 626                                                                             Notice of Availability invited comments
                                         Cochrans Mill Road, P.O. Box 10940,                     further consideration in view of two
                                                                                                 principal needs. First, the project would             on the draft EIS and participation in the
                                         Pittsburgh, PA 15236–0940; telephone:                                                                         NEPA process. As part of the review
                                         412–386–6065; or e-mail:                                meet the Congressional mandate to
                                                                                                                                                       process, DOE conducted a public
                                         Richard.Hargis@netl.doe.gov. For                        demonstrate advanced coal-based
                                                                                                                                                       hearing on September 13, 2006, in
                                         general information on the DOE NEPA                     technologies that can generate clean,
                                                                                                                                                       Orlando, Florida. DOE also conducted
                                         process, contact Ms. Carol M.                           reliable, and affordable electricity in the
                                                                                                                                                       an informational session prior to the
                                         Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA                     United States. Second, the
                                                                                                                                                       hearing for the public to learn more
                                         Policy and Compliance (GC–20), U.S.                     demonstration would provide a more
                                                                                                                                                       about the proposed project. The public
                                         Department of Energy, 1000                              cost-effective fuel supply for integration            was encouraged to provide oral
                                         Independence Avenue, SW.,                               with a privately funded combined-cycle                comments at the hearings and to submit
                                         Washington, DC 20585–0103; telephone:                   unit to generate electricity.                         written comments to DOE during a 45-
                                         202–586–4600; or leave a toll-free                         More specifically, the Orlando Project             day public comment period that ended
                                         message at 1–800–472–2756.                              could demonstrate advanced coal                       October 10, 2006. DOE received oral
                                         SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE has                      gasification for power generation                     comments from two individuals at the
                                         prepared this ROD pursuant to Council                   applications using IGCC technology at a               public hearing, and written comments
                                         on Environmental Quality (CEQ)                          sufficiently large scale to allow                     from three individuals, one non-
                                         regulations for implementing the                        industries and utilities to assess the                governmental organization, two Federal
                                         procedural provisions of NEPA [40 Code                  project’s potential for commercial                    agencies, and one local agency during
                                         of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts                      application. A successful demonstration               and after the public hearing.
                                         1500–1508] and DOE NEPA regulations                     would confirm that the technology                        In January 2007, DOE issued the final
                                         (10 CFR Part 1021). This ROD is based                   could be implemented at the                           EIS and the Environmental Protection
                                         on DOE’s final EIS for the Orlando                      commercial scale. The cost-shared                     Agency (EPA) published a Notice of
                                         Gasification Project (DOE/EIS–0383,                     contribution by DOE would help reduce                 Availability of the final EIS in the
                                         January 2007).                                          the risk to the Southern Company team                 Federal Register on January 26, 2007
                                                                                                 in demonstrating the technology at the                (72 FR 3846). In the final EIS, DOE
                                         Background and Purpose and Need for                                                                           considered and, as appropriate,
                                                                                                 level of maturity needed for decisions
                                         Agency Action                                                                                                 responded to public comments on the
                                                                                                 on commercialization.
                                           In 2002, the U.S. Congress established                                                                      draft EIS. Among the issues raised in the
                                         the CCPI program to accelerate                             Further, the transport gasifier                    comments on the draft EIS were
                                         commercial deployment of advanced                       technology that would be demonstrated                 concerns about (1) Carbon dioxide (CO2)
                                         coal-based technologies for generating                  offers a simpler method for generating                emissions and mitigation options; (2)
                                         clean, reliable, and affordable electricity             power from coal than other alternatives.              vehicle and rail traffic; (3) mercury
                                         in the United States. Congress indicated                It is unique among coal gasification                  deposition and bioaccumulation; (4)
                                         that projects in the program should be                  technologies in that it is cost-effective             ambient concentrations of ozone; (5)
                                         industry enterprises assisted by the                    when handling low rank coals and                      environmental justice considerations;
                                         government and not government-                          when using coals with high moisture or                and (6) air toxics impacts.
                                         directed demonstrations. These projects                 high ash content. These coals make up
                                                                                                 half the proven reserves in both the U.S.             Project Location and Description
                                         are expected to showcase technologies
                                         in which coal-fired power plants can                    and the world. Moreover, the transport                   The Orlando Project would be located
                                         continue to generate low cost electricity               gasifier is capable of both air- and                  at OUC’s existing 3,280-acre Stanton
                                         with improved efficiency and comply                     oxygen-blown operation. This inherent                 Energy Center in eastern Orange County,
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES




                                         with more stringent environmental                       flexibility will allow it to readily adapt            approximately 3 miles east of the
                                         standards expected in the future.                       to other applications beyond power                    eastern city limits of Orlando, Florida,
                                           DOE issued the second-round CCPI                      generation including chemical                         and about 13 miles east-southeast of
                                         solicitation in February 2004 and                       production and possible future carbon                 downtown Orlando. The topography of
                                         received 13 proposals in June 2004. The                 management requirements.                              the area is relatively flat. The new


                                    VerDate Aug<31>2005   18:39 Apr 05, 2007   Jkt 211001   PO 00000   Frm 00054   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\06APN1.SGM   06APN1
                                                                           Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 66 / Friday, April 6, 2007 / Notices                                           17145

                                         facilities would be constructed on                      partial funding of projects owned and                 environmental permitting activities, and
                                         approximately 35 of the 1,100 acres of                  controlled by non-Federal sponsors.                   preparation of environmental
                                         land that were previously cleared,                      This statutory requirement places DOE                 information for NEPA analysis.
                                         leveled, and licensed for power plant                   in a much more limited role than if the                  Although DOE funding would support
                                         use. The project equipment would be                     Federal government were the owner and                 only the Orlando Project (i.e., coal
                                         located between existing coal-fired units               operator of the project. In the latter                gasifier, synthesis gas cleanup systems,
                                         and an existing natural gas-fired                       situation, DOE would be responsible for               and supporting infrastructure), the
                                         combined-cycle unit. A short                            a comprehensive review of reasonable                  Orlando Project would be integrated
                                         transmission line (approximately 3,200                  alternatives for siting the project.
                                                                                                                                                       with a privately funded, combined-cycle
                                         ft in length), proposed to serve as an                  However, in dealing with an applicant
                                                                                                                                                       unit, which together would constitute
                                         electrical interconnection from the                     under the CCPI Program, DOE must
                                                                                                                                                       the IGCC facilities. The IGCC facilities
                                         proposed facilities to an existing onsite               focus on alternative ways to accomplish
                                                                                                                                                       would convert coal into synthesis gas to
                                         substation, would occupy a small                        CCPI’s purpose that reflect both the
                                         amount of additional land. Land use in                  application before it and the role DOE                drive a gas combustion turbine, and hot
                                         the vicinity includes undeveloped areas                 plays in the decisional process. It is                exhaust gas from the gas turbine would
                                         interspersed with a mixture of                          appropriate in such cases for DOE to                  generate steam from water to drive a
                                         residential and commercial buildings, as                give substantial weight to the                        steam turbine. Combined, the two
                                         well as a park, correctional facility, and              applicant’s desires in establishing a                 turbines would generate 285 MW
                                         landfill.                                               project’s reasonable alternatives.                    (megawatts) of electricity. This proven,
                                            Construction would begin in late 2007                   Based on the foregoing principles, the             reliable combined-cycle approach of
                                         and continue until early 2010. An                       only reasonable alternative here to the               using a gas turbine and steam turbine in
                                         average of about 350 construction                       proposed action was the no-action                     tandem increases the amount of
                                         workers would be on the site during                     alternative, including one scenario that              electricity that can be generated from a
                                         construction. Approximately 600 to 700                  could reasonably be expected to result                given amount of fuel. The IGCC
                                         workers would be required during the                    as a consequence of the no-action                     facilities are expected to provide a
                                         peak construction period between fall                   alternative. DOE dismissed from further               source of electricity that is reliable, low
                                         2008 and spring 2009. After mechanical                  consideration other alternatives that did             cost, environmentally sound, and
                                         checkout of the proposed facilities,                    not meet the goals and objectives of the              efficient. DOE expects that
                                         demonstration (including data analysis                  CCPI Program or of the applicant.                     approximately 40% of the energy in the
                                         and process evaluation) would be                           The Stanton Energy Center was the                  fuel would be converted to electricity
                                         conducted over a 4.5-year period from                   only location identified in Southern’s                compared to about 33% for
                                         mid 2010 until late 2014.                               CCPI proposal. It is an existing site at              conventional coal-fired power plants.
                                            If the demonstration is successful,                  which the private partners have already               The IGCC facilities would substantially
                                         commercial operation would follow                       established a business relationship.                  reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide
                                         immediately. The combined workforce                     Because it is an existing site, DOE                   (SO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and
                                         (i.e., including the Orlando Gasification               concluded that it would be preferable to              mercury relative to existing,
                                         Project and the combined-cycle                          any undeveloped location.                             conventional coal-fired power plants.
                                         generating unit) would consist of                          DOE considered alternative
                                         approximately 72 employees added to                     technologies but dismissed them as                    No-Action Alternative
                                         the existing Stanton Energy Center staff                unreasonable. Technologies and
                                                                                                 approaches that did not involve the use                  Under the no-action alternative, DOE
                                         of 204 employees. Of the 72 new
                                                                                                 of coal (e.g., natural gas, wind power,               would not provide cost-shared funding
                                         employees, 19 workers would provide
                                                                                                 solar energy, and conservation) would                 for the design, construction, and
                                         support only during the startup and
                                                                                                 not contribute to the CCPI Program goal               demonstration of the proposed Orlando
                                         demonstration phases of the project,
                                                                                                 of accelerating commercial deployment                 Project at OUC’s Stanton Energy Center
                                         while 53 employees would be needed
                                                                                                 of advanced coal-based technologies.                  near Orlando, Florida. Based on
                                         over the lifetime of the facilities. The
                                                                                                 Other alternatives, such as reducing the              information from the private partners,
                                         facilities would be designed for a
                                                                                                 size of the proposed project, were                    without DOE participation, Southern
                                         lifetime of at least 20 years, including
                                         the 4.5-year demonstration period.                      dismissed as unreasonable. The design                 Company and/or OUC could reasonably
                                            The new coal gasifier would operate                  size for the proposed project was                     be expected to pursue at least one
                                         entirely on coal, consuming a total of                  selected because it is sufficiently large             option (i.e., the combined-cycle
                                         approximately 1,020,000 tons per year                   to show potential customers that the                  facilities would be built at the Stanton
                                         to produce synthesis gas. Two to three                  gasification technology, once                         Energy Center and operated using
                                         trains per week would deliver low-                      demonstrated at this scale, could be                  natural gas as fuel, without the gasifier,
                                         sulfur subbituminous coal from the                      applied commercially without further                  synthesis gas cleanup systems, and
                                         Powder River Basin in Wyoming. The                      scale-up. The size of the proposed                    supporting infrastructure). Accordingly,
                                         heating value of the coal would average                 project is also related to OUC’s                      DOE analyzed a no-action alternative
                                         about 8,760 Btu/lb and the sulfur                       projected need for power.                             scenario in which combined-cycle
                                         content would average about 0.26%.                                                                            facilities would operate using natural
                                                                                                 Proposed Action                                       gas as fuel without the availability of
                                         Most air emissions would result from
                                         combustion of synthesis gas in the gas                    The proposed action is for DOE to                   synthesis gas. Under the no-action
                                         combustion turbine during normal                        provide Southern Company a total of                   alternative, commercialization of the
                                         operations. The exhaust gas would be                    $235 million in cost-shared funding to                gasification facilities (alone or
                                         released to the atmosphere via a 205-ft                 design, construct, and demonstrate the                integrated with the combined-cycle
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES




                                         stack.                                                  Orlando Project. A portion ($13.762                   facilities to form IGCC technology)
                                                                                                 million) of this funding has already                  would probably not occur because
                                         Alternatives                                            been provided for activities in the first             utilities and industries tend to use
                                           Congress directed DOE to pursue the                   budget period, such as project                        known and demonstrated technologies
                                         goals of the CCPI Program by means of                   definition, front-end engineering design,             rather than unproven technologies.


                                    VerDate Aug<31>2005   18:39 Apr 05, 2007   Jkt 211001   PO 00000   Frm 00055   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\06APN1.SGM   06APN1
                                         17146                             Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 66 / Friday, April 6, 2007 / Notices

                                         Potential Environmental Impacts and                     are less than ‘‘significant impact levels,’’          of air pollutants, including: (1)
                                         Mitigation Measures                                     then no further modeling for regulatory               Application of Best Available Control
                                            In making its decision, DOE                          purposes is required.) Modeling results               Technology; (2) enclosure of coal
                                         considered the environmental impacts                    also predicted that, combined with                    unloading, transfer, and conveying
                                         of the proposed action and the no-action                ambient background concentrations,                    equipment, plus application of water
                                                                                                 pollutant concentrations from Orlando                 sprays, as needed, and use of baghouses
                                         alternative on potentially affected
                                                                                                 Project emissions would be less than                  at key transfer points; (3) use of high
                                         environmental resource areas. These
                                                                                                 corresponding ambient air quality                     temperature, high pressure filters within
                                         include: land use and aesthetics,
                                                                                                 standards. Concentrations would be                    the gasification process to collect
                                         atmospheric resources and air quality,
                                                                                                 negligible at the nearest Prevention of               particulate matter from the synthesis
                                         geology and soils, water resources,
                                                                                                 Significant Deterioration (PSD) Class I               gas; (4) use of gas cleanup technology to
                                         floodplains and wetlands, ecological
                                                                                                 area about 90 miles to the west-                      reduce sulfur concentrations in the
                                         resources, social and economic
                                                                                                 northwest. (Class I areas are designated              synthesis gas; and (5) use of activated
                                         resources (including environmental
                                                                                                 areas in which the degradation of air                 carbon to remove mercury from the
                                         justice and cultural resources), waste
                                                                                                 quality is to be severely restricted.)                synthesis gas.
                                         management, human health and safety,                    Annual NOX emissions from the Stanton                    Southern would monitor to ensure
                                         noise, and transportation. While the                    Energy Center overall would not be                    emissions compliance. DOE expects the
                                         proposed project consists of only the                   expected to increase because, as part of              proposed facilities to be subject to the
                                         gasifier, synthesis gas cleanup systems,                the air permitting process, OUC has                   Clean Air Interstate Rule, Clean Air
                                         and supporting infrastructure, the EIS                  agreed to reduce NOX emissions from                   Mercury Rule, applicable New Source
                                         includes the combined-cycle generating                  other units at the Stanton Energy Center              Performance Standards, and 40 CFR Part
                                         unit in the analysis of environmental                   so that there would be a net decrease in              75 (Acid Rain Program). In general,
                                         impacts because the facilities are                      NOX emissions. Annual emissions of                    these Federal rules require continuous
                                         operationally interdependent. The EIS                   volatile organic compounds (VOCs), a                  monitoring and recording of SO2, NOX,
                                         considers the impacts from these                        precursor of the criteria pollutant ozone,            and mercury emissions. Monitoring
                                         facilities combined with those from                     would be 129 tons. The small                          would be subject to stringent quality
                                         other, existing facilities at the Stanton               percentage increase in VOC emissions                  assurance and control requirements to
                                         Energy Center, and also examines                        (approximately 0.3% of the Orange                     ensure that the monitored emissions
                                         potential incremental impacts of the                    County 2001 emission inventory) would                 data are accurate and complete.
                                         project in combination with other past,                 not be likely to degrade air quality                     Southern would conduct initial and
                                         present and reasonably foreseeable                      sufficiently to cause violations of the               periodic compliance testing pursuant to
                                         future actions (i.e., cumulative impacts).              ozone standard, but the magnitude of                  Florida Department of Environmental
                                         The following sections provide key                      the degradation cannot be quantified.                 Protection requirements. This stack
                                         findings for areas of potential concern.                The maximum ambient 24-hour                           testing, using EPA reference methods, is
                                         Land Use and Aesthetics                                 concentration of mercury from the                     expected to address the principal air
                                                                                                 proposed HRSG stack is predicted to be                pollutants emitted by the proposed
                                            The Orlando Project would be                         0.8% of its corresponding guideline                   facilities, including carbon monoxide,
                                         confined to the existing Stanton Energy                 value, and the maximum ambient 24-                    VOCs, and particulate matter.
                                         Center site and thus would not directly                 hour concentration of beryllium from                     Approximately 25% less CO2 would
                                         affect offsite land use. The 1,100-acre                 the stack is predicted to be 0.4% of its              be produced per unit of power
                                         developed portion of the power plant                    guideline value. These results indicate               generated compared to typical emission
                                         site is already zoned specifically for                  that mercury and beryllium emissions                  rates at existing, conventional coal-fired
                                         power generation through the site                       from the proposed facilities alone or in              power plants. However, there would be
                                         certification process under the Florida                 combination with other sources would                  a net increase in global emissions of
                                         Electrical Power Plant Siting Act. The                  pose no threat to human health in the                 CO2. For this project, mitigation, such as
                                         tallest new structures would be the 205-                area. Any potential odors would be                    capture and sequestration, is not
                                         ft heat recovery steam generator (HRSG)                 limited to the immediate site area and                feasible because the planned sulfur
                                         stack, the 174-ft structure to house the                would not affect offsite areas. Increases             removal technology would not generate
                                         gasifier, and the 114-ft HRSG. These                    in CO2 emissions from the proposed                    a concentrated CO2 stream. However,
                                         structures would be shorter than the                    facilities would add 1.8 million tons per             even if the facilities were to generate a
                                         existing two 550-ft stacks serving two                  year to an estimated global emission of               concentrated CO2 stream, the nearest
                                         boiler buildings. Aesthetic impacts                     26,000 million tons per year.                         location amenable to CO2 sequestration
                                         would be reduced because the facilities                    The proposed project would                         options that have been demonstrated at
                                         would be located between existing                       significantly reduce additional SO2,                  the scale needed (i.e., enhanced oil
                                         facilities, appearing as part of the site.              NOX, mercury, and particulate                         recovery) would be hundreds of miles
                                            Under the no-action alternative,                     emissions by removing constituents                    away. The feasibility and effectiveness
                                         offsite land use would be the same, but                 from the synthesis gas. The removal of                of other sequestration options, such as
                                         because the 174-ft structure to house the               approximately 80% of the fuel-bound                   injection into saline formations, are not
                                         gasifier would not be required, aesthetic               nitrogen from the synthesis gas prior to              promising for this area and have not
                                         impacts would be less than those                        combustion in the gas turbine would                   been fully characterized. Sequestration
                                         predicted under the proposed action.                    result in appreciably lower NOX                       options for all regions of the country are
                                                                                                 emissions compared to existing,                       still under investigation in DOE’s
                                         Air Resources                                                                                                 Carbon Sequestration Program. A
                                                                                                 conventional coal-fired power plants.
                                            Modeling results based on emissions                  The project is expected to remove up to               program goal is to initiate at least one
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES




                                         from the Orlando Project predicted that                 95% of sulfur and over 90% of mercury                 large-scale demonstration, at the scale
                                         maximum concentrations would be less                    emissions. Over 99.9% of particulate                  required for a power plant, in 2009 to
                                         than their corresponding ‘‘significant                  emissions would be removed.                           demonstrate the appropriateness for CO2
                                         impact levels.’’ (Under EPA guidelines,                    During operation, a number of means                injectivity and validate storage capacity
                                         if maximum predicted concentrations                     would be employed to reduce emissions                 estimates and permanence.


                                    VerDate Aug<31>2005   18:39 Apr 05, 2007   Jkt 211001   PO 00000   Frm 00056   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\06APN1.SGM   06APN1
                                                                           Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 66 / Friday, April 6, 2007 / Notices                                         17147

                                            Under the no-action alternative,                     Certification would ensure continued                  brushland. To mitigate impacts to the
                                         emissions of air pollutants would be                    monitoring of groundwater withdrawal                  wetland area, OUC would purchase
                                         less than those predicted for the new                   rates from the Upper Floridan aquifer.                credits at a local mitigation bank. The
                                         facilities. Also, because the flare would               In the unlikely event of a fuel spill or              total number of acres required to
                                         not be required, no occasional emissions                other release, assessment and recovery                mitigate the wetlands impacts would be
                                         from a flare would occur.                               would be conducted in accordance with                 determined after deliberations between
                                                                                                 Florida Department of Environmental                   the Florida Department of
                                         Water Resources
                                                                                                 Protection requirements.                              Environmental Protection, the St. John’s
                                            Because construction would occur in                    Runoff during construction and                      River Water Management District, and
                                         developed site areas where surface                      operation, as well as all effluents from              the Army Corps of Engineers.
                                         water runoff is directed to onsite                      operation, would flow through the                        Under the no-action alternative, no
                                         stormwater retention ponds and is used                  existing Stanton Energy Center                        floodplains would be affected and,
                                         in the facilities, no impacts to natural                collection and reuse system. No offsite               because the new transmission line
                                         surface waters would be experienced,                    discharges would occur, except during a               would still be required, the same
                                         except in the unlikely event of a major                 major storm event. Site-specific Best                 alteration of wetland and other
                                         storm that caused overflow of the site                  Management Practices to prevent the                   vegetation communities within the
                                         stormwater collection system.                           deposition of sediments beyond the                    transmission corridor would be
                                         Transmission line construction outside                  construction areas would include silt                 experienced.
                                         the main plant area could result in soil                fences, hay bales, vegetative covers, and
                                         erosion and sediment deposition to                                                                            Ecological Resources
                                                                                                 diversions, to reduce impacts to surface
                                         streams, but best management practices                  water. No process wastewater would be                    The land where the Orlando Project
                                         described below would minimize                          directly discharged to any surface                    would be constructed is not important
                                         erosion and sedimentation. Impacts                      waters, but would be reused.                          habitat for wildlife, and no areas of
                                         from lowering the water table during                      Under the no-action alternative,                    ecological sensitivity would be affected
                                         dewatering would be inconsequential.                    cooling water requirements would be                   directly. Wildlife species would be
                                            Because operation of the facilities                  about 20% less than under the proposed                affected by construction activities and
                                         would not withdraw surface water or                     action. Releases to wetlands                          resultant loss of habitat in the
                                         discharge liquid effluent, surface waters               downstream from the Orange County                     transmission corridor. Smaller less
                                         would experience no direct impacts.                     Eastern Water Reclamation Facility and                mobile animals would be at greatest
                                         The Stanton Energy Center’s use of                      from the wetlands to the                              risk, whereas larger more mobile
                                         reclaimed water would increase by an                    Econlockhatchee River would be                        animals would likely move from the
                                         average of 2.1 million gallons per day                  reduced by 20%, and use of                            disturbed areas and increase
                                         (from 10.2 million to about 12.3 million                groundwater would be the same as                      surrounding habitat use. No Federally-
                                         gallons per day), thus reducing by a                    under the proposed action.                            listed threatened or endangered plant
                                         similar amount the water volume                                                                               species are known to occur within the
                                         discharged to the wetlands downstream                   Floodplains and Wetlands
                                                                                                                                                       immediate vicinity of the main
                                         from the Eastern Water Reclamation                         No floodplains would be affected by                proposed facilities or the transmission
                                         Facility and from those wetlands to the                 the Orlando Project because no                        corridor. Five plant species protected by
                                         Econlockhatchee River. Because this                     construction would occur within a                     the Florida Department of Agriculture
                                         surface water is not used, reduced flow                 floodplain. During construction,                      and Consumer Services are known to
                                         would not affect water users. Water                     wetland and other vegetation                          occur along or in the vicinity of the
                                         quality in the river could be affected if               communities within the transmission                   transmission corridor. Clearing and
                                         reduced streamflow also reduced the                     corridor would be altered. Because tall-              maintenance activities on the right-of-
                                         river’s capacity to dilute contamination                growing vegetation would be cut and                   way would be expected to destroy some
                                         discharged from other parts of the                      kept at a height low enough to prevent                individual plants, but populations
                                         watershed, however any such effects                     interference with the conductors, forest              would persist in undisturbed areas.
                                         would be temporary. Increased                           cover habitats would be reduced and                   Other than transient or incidental use by
                                         groundwater withdrawals would not                       shrub or other low-growing vegetation                 some wildlife species, no federally-
                                         produce discernible impacts. Facility                   would eventually dominate the corridor.               listed threatened or endangered animal
                                         operation could add localized                           Construction of the transmission line                 species are found within the previously
                                         contamination to shallow groundwater                    would require submittal of a joint (1)                cleared 1,100 acres. Except for the five
                                         from the possible placement of                          Army Corps of Engineers Section 404                   protected plants, no direct impacts are
                                         additional waste in the onsite ash                      dredge-and-fill wetlands application                  expected to listed species from
                                         landfill. Because any contamination                     and (2) Florida Department of                         proposed construction and operations.
                                         would be limited to the shallow aquifer                 Environmental Protection                              The site contains no appreciable natural
                                         and any contaminated groundwater                        environmental resource permit. This                   aquatic resources.
                                         would be designed to discharge to                       permitting process would also require                    Impacts under the no-action
                                         onsite stormwater collection systems,                   OUC to commit to a mitigation plan for                alternative would be the same as for the
                                         impacts to water users are unlikely.                    any unavoidable wetland impacts. The                  proposed facilities.
                                            The new coal pile would be lined and                 net effect of clearing and maintaining
                                         leachate collected to prevent the                       3.95 acres of wetland habitat for the                 Social and Economic Resources
                                         introduction of pollutants into                         transmission line would be (1) Loss of                  Construction and operation of the
                                         groundwater. Use of treated wastewater                  1.04 acres of wetland due to fill and (2)             Orlando Project would not result in
                                         effluent and other reclaimed water for                  modification of vegetation in wetlands                major impacts to population, housing,
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES




                                         cooling water makeup would minimize                     in the remainder of the corridor due to               local government revenues, or most
                                         the withdrawal and consumption of                       right-of-way maintenance. This would                  public services in Orange County.
                                         Floridan aquifer groundwater.                           shift, to a small extent, the balance of              However, because the county’s public
                                         Measurement programs specified in the                   wildlife habitat in the area away from                schools are already above capacity, even
                                         Stanton Energy Center Conditions of                     wetland and forest toward shrub and                   the small increase in the number of


                                    VerDate Aug<31>2005   18:39 Apr 05, 2007   Jkt 211001   PO 00000   Frm 00057   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\06APN1.SGM   06APN1
                                         17148                             Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 66 / Friday, April 6, 2007 / Notices

                                         students as a consequence of the new                    operational SO2, NOX, and particulate                 peak construction period. Also,
                                         facilities would contribute to                          matter emissions from the new facilities.             Southern Company and OUC have
                                         overcrowding. Overall, construction and                 With regard to health effects of                      committed to a number of measures that
                                         operation of the proposed facilities                    hazardous air pollutants, the Orlando                 would mitigate these potential traffic
                                         would have positive effects on                          Project would pose less risk than most                impacts. A construction traffic impact
                                         employment and income in the region.                    existing plants, many of which were                   mitigation program, which is required
                                            The relatively large minority                        built decades ago. A health risk analysis             by the Stanton Energy Center
                                         populations in and around the census                    of hazardous air pollutants from the                  Conditions of Certification, would be
                                         tract in which the Stanton Energy                       proposed facilities estimated that                    developed and implemented. Such a
                                         Center is located (Census Tract 167.22)                 concentrations of all hazardous air                   program could include encouraging
                                         represent ‘‘environmental justice’’                     pollutants would be below the threshold               construction workers to carpool;
                                         populations to which adverse impacts                    concentrations (below harmful levels).                working with the local mass-transit
                                         could be distributed disproportionately.                   A catastrophic accident (e.g., a                   system to provide workers with a park-
                                         However, impacts to land use and                        significant hazardous material release,               and-ride service to the site; using the
                                         aesthetics would not be significant for                 fire, or explosion) associated with the               existing railway access to the Stanton
                                         the population as a whole and would                     facilities, including transportation of               Energy Center site for the delivery of
                                         not contribute to disproportionately                    anhydrous ammonia off the site, would                 some construction equipment and
                                         high and adverse impacts. Likewise,                     be unlikely.                                          materials; staggering construction work
                                         with regard to health effects and noise,                   Southern Company and OUC would                     schedules and shifts to avoid peak
                                         there would be no significant adverse                   add project specific health and safety-               traffic hours; and working with the
                                         impacts to the population as a whole,                   related plans to those already in place               Florida Department of Transportation to
                                         and no disproportionately high and                      for existing Stanton Energy Center units              provide temporary traffic control
                                         adverse effects would be experienced.                   to prevent or minimize potential                      devices and alter signal times to assist
                                            Under the no-action alternative, the                 adverse impacts. These measures would                 in maintaining proper traffic flow. If the
                                         peak and average construction work                      include appropriate training and                      Avalon Park Boulevard extension
                                         force would be reduced, and the                         supervision of employees and                          project is completed prior to project
                                         construction period would be cut from                   enforcement of workplace safety                       construction, traffic issues would
                                         28 months to 24 months. Fewer                           policies.                                             largely be mitigated and more modest
                                         operational workers would be required                      Southern Company and OUC would                     mitigation could be considered.
                                         (21 rather than 72). Positive economic                  develop and implement a safety                        However, DOE acknowledges that these
                                         benefits would also be less.                            program for the chlorine and ammonia                  mitigation steps would not completely
                                         Waste Management                                        systems that would include emergency                  eliminate traffic impacts.
                                                                                                 response measures as well as specify                     Noise related to transportation would
                                            The Orange County Sanitary Landfill                  training protocols.                                   not be expected to be significant. At the
                                         would have ample capacity to receive                       Excess ammonia generated at the                    nearest residence, noise levels from
                                         project construction wastes. Ash                        proposed facilities would be handled                  truck traffic on Alafaya Trail would be
                                         generated by the Orlando Project is                     and transported according to the                      at about the same level as that of a quiet
                                         being evaluated for several possible                    Department of Transportation’s                        subdivision during daylight hours.
                                         beneficial uses that could avoid disposal               hazardous materials regulations.                      Noise levels from current rail traffic
                                         in the onsite landfill. If no beneficial use               Because emissions of air pollutants                have not caused any public complaints.
                                         is found, the 347-acre dedicated landfill               would be less under the no-action                     Increased rail traffic due to the proposed
                                         would provide more than enough space                    alternative, adverse impacts to human                 project would result in more frequent
                                         to dispose of this ash, as well as other                health would be less.                                 noise from rail traffic, but the noise
                                         coal combustion wastes generated by                                                                           levels would be the same.
                                         the Stanton Energy Center. The existing                 Noise
                                                                                                                                                          Traffic congestion would be less
                                         generating units would use the                            During operation of the proposed                    under the no-action alternative. No
                                         anhydrous ammonia produced by the                       facilities, the predicted noise level at the          additional trains would be needed to
                                         new facilities to satisfy their                         nearest residence (about 6,500 ft to the              deliver coal, but trucks would continue
                                         requirements, and any excess would be                   northeast) would be 46.5 dBA. No                      to deliver anhydrous ammonia to the
                                         sold commercially. If the elemental                     adverse community reaction would be                   site once per week. Noise levels
                                         sulfur generated by the facilities proves               expected as a result of noise levels                  associated with transportation would be
                                         to be as pure as it is projected to be, it              below 50 dBA. Noise from infrequent                   the same as for the new facilities but
                                         would be sold commercially. Otherwise,                  steam blows would attenuate to a level                would be less frequent.
                                         it would be placed in the onsite landfill.              of about 66 dBA at the nearest property
                                         Elemental sulfur would not be a                         boundary and 60 dBA at the nearest                    Environmentally Preferred Alternative
                                         hazardous waste, and the quantity                       residence. A level of 60 dBA would be                   The no-action alternative is
                                         produced would be small in comparison                   typical of normal conversation.                       environmentally preferable because it
                                         with the total capacity of the landfill.                  Noise would be essentially the same                 would result in slightly less impacts
                                            Under the no-action alternative, the                 under the no-action alternative.                      than those predicted for the proposed
                                         quantities of construction wastes would                                                                       action.
                                                                                                 Transportation
                                         be slightly less. Also, because no ash
                                                                                                    Much of the work on planned road                   Comments Received on the Final EIS
                                         would be generated, no disposal sites
                                         would be needed to accommodate ash.                     projects could coincide with                            The only comments that DOE
                                         No anhydrous ammonia or elemental                       construction and operation of the new                 received on the final EIS were from the
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES




                                         sulfur would be produced.                               facilities, creating a major cumulative               U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                                                                                 impact to traffic flow on the local road              (EPA), Region 4, NEPA Program Office.
                                         Human Health and Safety                                 network. This impact would be reduced                 EPA stated that the final EIS was
                                           Minimal adverse impacts to human                      if the Avalon Park Boulevard extension                responsive to their comments on the
                                         health would be expected from                           is completed in mid-2008 before the                   draft EIS, but observed that direct,


                                    VerDate Aug<31>2005   18:39 Apr 05, 2007   Jkt 211001   PO 00000   Frm 00058   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\06APN1.SGM   06APN1
                                                                           Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 66 / Friday, April 6, 2007 / Notices                                           17149

                                         indirect, and cumulative impacts are                    market-based rate authority, with an                  on the Commission’s Web site under the
                                         inherent in projects that generate power.               accompanying rate tariff. The proposed                ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission
                                         Therefore, EPA stated that verification                 market-based rate tariff provides for the             strongly encourages electronic filings.
                                         of the impacts on air quality, wetlands,                sale of energy, capacity and ancillary
                                                                                                                                                       Philis J. Posey,
                                         hazardous waste, and cumulative                         services at market-based rates.
                                         impacts will need to take place as the                  Brookfield also requested waivers of                  Acting Secretary.
                                         project progresses, with appropriate                    various Commission regulations. In                    [FR Doc. E7–6439 Filed 4–5–07; 8:45 am]
                                         avoidance and mitigation measures                       particular, Brookfield requested that the             BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
                                         implemented. DOE anticipated verifying                  Commission grant blanket approval
                                         impacts through an environmental                        under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future
                                         monitoring plan. This plan will be                      issuances of securities and assumptions               DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
                                         developed as part of the cooperative                    of liability by Brookfield.
                                                                                                    On March 30, 2007, pursuant to                     Federal Energy Regulatory
                                         agreement with Southern Company, and                                                                          Commission
                                         reports on monitoring activities will be                delegated authority, the Director,
                                         included in the reports required under                  Division of Tariffs and Market
                                         the cooperative agreement.                              Development—West, granted the                         [Docket No. ER07–589–000]
                                           EPA also expressed appreciation of                    requests for blanket approval under Part
                                                                                                 34. The Director’s order also stated that             Citigroup Energy Canada ULC; Notice
                                         DOE’s consideration of diesel retrofit
                                                                                                 the Commission would publish a                        of Issuance of Order
                                         technology to minimize emissions from
                                         construction equipment. As stated in                    separate notice in the Federal Register               April 2, 2007.
                                         the final EIS, specification of the use of              establishing a period of time for the
                                                                                                                                                          Citigroup Energy Canada ULC (CECU)
                                         diesel retrofit technologies is not                     filing of protests. Accordingly, any
                                                                                                                                                       filed an application for market-based
                                         warranted since impacts from diesel                     person desiring to be heard or to protest
                                                                                                                                                       rate authority, with an accompanying
                                         engines during construction are not                     the blanket approvals of issuances of
                                                                                                                                                       rate schedule. The proposed market-
                                         expected to be a concern. However, DOE                  securities or assumptions of liability by
                                                                                                                                                       based rate schedule provides for the sale
                                         will encourage Southern Company to                      Brookfield should file a motion to
                                                                                                                                                       of energy, capacity and ancillary
                                         consider the use of biodiesel and diesel                intervene or protest with the Federal
                                                                                                                                                       services at market-based rates. CECU
                                         retrofit technologies during construction               Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
                                                                                                                                                       also requested waivers of various
                                         activities to further reduce impacts.                   First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,
                                                                                                                                                       Commission regulations. In particular,
                                                                                                 in accordance with Rules 211 and 214
                                         Decision                                                                                                      CECU requested that the Commission
                                                                                                 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice
                                                                                                 and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214                grant blanket approval under 18 CFR
                                           DOE will implement the proposed                                                                             Part 34 of all future issuances of
                                         action, providing, through a cooperative                (2004).
                                                                                                    Notice is hereby given that the                    securities and assumptions of liability
                                         agreement with Southern Company, a                                                                            by CECU.
                                         total of $235 million in cost-shared                    deadline for filing motions to intervene
                                                                                                 or protest is April 30, 2007.                            On March 30, 2007, pursuant to
                                         funding to design, construct, and                                                                             delegated authority, the Director,
                                                                                                    Absent a request to be heard in
                                         demonstrate the Orlando Gasification                                                                          Division of Tariffs and Market
                                                                                                 opposition by the deadline above,
                                         Project.                                                                                                      Development—West, granted the
                                                                                                 Brookfield is authorized to issue
                                           DOE’s decision was made upon                                                                                requests for blanket approval under Part
                                                                                                 securities and assume obligations or
                                         careful review of the potential                                                                               34. The Director’s order also stated that
                                                                                                 liabilities as a guarantor, indorser,
                                         environmental impacts, presented in the                                                                       the Commission would publish a
                                                                                                 surety, or otherwise in respect of any
                                         EIS, and incorporates all practicable                                                                         separate notice in the Federal Register
                                                                                                 security of another person; provided
                                         means to avoid or minimize                                                                                    establishing a period of time for the
                                                                                                 that such issuance or assumption is for
                                         environmental harm. DOE plans to                                                                              filing of protests. Accordingly, any
                                                                                                 some lawful object within the corporate
                                         verify the environmental impacts                                                                              person desiring to be heard or to protest
                                                                                                 purposes of Brookfield, compatible with
                                         predicted in the EIS and the                                                                                  the blanket approvals of issuances of
                                                                                                 the public interest, and is reasonably
                                         implementation of appropriate                                                                                 securities or assumptions of liability by
                                                                                                 necessary or appropriate for such
                                         avoidance and mitigation measures.                                                                            CECU should file a motion to intervene
                                                                                                 purposes.
                                           Issued in Washington, DC on this 28th day                The Commission reserves the right to               or protest with the Federal Energy
                                         of March 2007.                                          require a further showing that neither                Regulatory Commission, 888 First
                                         James A. Slutz,                                         public nor private interests will be                  Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in
                                         Acting Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy.           adversely affected by continued                       accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of
                                         [FR Doc. E7–6435 Filed 4–5–07; 8:45 am]                 approvals of Brookfield’s issuance of                 the Commission’s Rules of Practice and
                                         BILLING CODE 6450–01–P                                  securities or assumptions of liability.               Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214
                                                                                                    Copies of the full text of the Director’s          (2004).
                                                                                                 Order are available from the                             Notice is hereby given that the
                                         DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY                                    Commission’s Public Reference Room,                   deadline for filing motions to intervene
                                                                                                 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC                 or protest is April 30, 2007.
                                         Federal Energy Regulatory                               20426. The Order may also be viewed                      Absent a request to be heard in
                                         Commission                                              on the Commission’s Web site at                       opposition by the deadline above, CECU
                                                                                                 http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary               is authorized to issue securities and
                                         [Docket No. ER07–528–000]
                                                                                                 link. Enter the docket number excluding               assume obligations or liabilities as a
                                                                                                 the last three digits in the docket                   guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES




                                         Brookfield Energy Marketing U.S. LLC;
                                         Notice of Issuance of Order                             number filed to access the document.                  in respect of any security of another
                                                                                                 Comments, protests, and interventions                 person; provided that such issuance or
                                         April 2, 2007.                                          may be filed electronically via the                   assumption is for some lawful object
                                           Brookfield Energy Marketing U.S. LLC                  internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR                within the corporate purposes of CECU,
                                         (Brookfield) filed an application for                   385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions              compatible with the public interest, and


                                    VerDate Aug<31>2005   18:39 Apr 05, 2007   Jkt 211001   PO 00000   Frm 00059   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\06APN1.SGM   06APN1

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:6
posted:1/29/2013
language:Latin
pages:7