[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 165 (Monday, August 25, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50001-50003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-19633]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and 
Notice of Wetlands Involvement for the Abengoa Biorefinery Project Near 
Hugoton, KS (DOE/EIS 0407)

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy (DOE).

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement, 
conduct a public scoping meeting, and opportunity for public comment; 
Notice of Wetlands Involvement.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces its intent to 
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality NEPA regulations (40 Code 
of Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts 1500-1508), and the DOE NEPA 
regulations (10 CFR Part 1021) to assess the potential environmental 
impacts of a project proposed by Abengoa Bioenergy Biomass of Kansas, 
LLC (ABBK), to construct and operate a biomass-to-ethanol and energy 
facility near Hugoton, Kansas (hereinafter termed ``Abengoa Biorefinery 
Project'' or the ``Project''). DOE's proposed action is to provide 
cost-share Federal funding to ABBK to construct and operate the 
Project. DOE is issuing this Notice of Intent to inform the public 
about the proposed action; announce plans to conduct a public scoping 
meeting; invite public participation in the scoping process; and 
solicit public comments for consideration in establishing the scope of 
the EIS, including the range of reasonable alternatives and the 
potential environmental impacts to be analyzed.

DATES: The public scoping period begins on August 25, 2008, and will 
continue through October 9, 2008. DOE will consider all comments 
received or postmarked by October 9, 2008, in defining the scope of 
this EIS. Comments received or postmarked after that date will be 
considered to the extent practicable. A public scoping meeting will be 
held in Memorial Hall at the Stevens County Courthouse, Hugoton, 
Kansas, on September 10, 2008 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. Written and oral 
comments will be given equal weight.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of the EIS should be directed 
to Kristin Kerwin at the U.S. Department of Energy Golden Field Office, 
1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401. You may also contact Ms. 
Kerwin by telephone at 303-275-4968, fascimilie at 303-275-4790, or e-
mail: [email protected]. Envelopes and the subject line of e-
mails should be labeled ``Abengoa EIS Scoping Comments.''
    The public scoping meeting will be held on September 10, 2008 from 
6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the following location: Memorial Hall, Stevens 
County Courthouse, 200 East 6th St., Hugoton, Kansas 67951-2606.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the proposed 
project, information on how to comment, or to receive a copy of the 
draft EIS when it is issued, contact Kristin Kerwin by any of the means 
described in the ADDRESSES section above.
    For further information on the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy Integrated Biorefinery Program, contact Jacques 
Beaudry-Losique, Biomass Program Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, 
1000 Independence Avenue, SW., EE-2E, 5H-021, Washington, DC 20585, 
telephone: 202-586-5188, facsimile: 202-586-1640, e-mail: [email protected].
    For general information on the DOE NEPA process, please contact: 
Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-
20), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0103; e-mail: [email protected]; telephone: 202-
586-4600; leave a message at 1-800-472-2756; or facsimile: 202-586-
7031.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background and Need for Agency Action: The Energy Policy Act of 
2005 (EPAct 2005), Section 932, directs the Secretary of Energy to 
conduct a program of research, development, demonstration, and 
commercial application for bioenergy, including, integrated 
biorefineries that may produce biopower, biofuels, and bioproducts. 
Section 932 provides that ``the goals of the biofuels and bioproducts 
programs shall be to develop, in partnership with industry and 
institutes of higher education--
    (1) Advanced biochemical and thermochemical conversion technologies 
capable of making fuels from lignocellulosic feedstocks that are price-
competitive with gasoline or diesel in either internal combustion 
engines or fuel cell-powered vehicles;
    (2) Advanced biotechnology processes capable of making biofuels and 
bioproducts with emphasis on development of biorefinery technologies 
using enzyme-based processing systems;
    (3) Advanced biotechnology processes capable of increasing energy 
production from lignocellulosic feedstocks, with emphasis on reducing 
the dependence of industry on fossil fuels in manufacturing facilities; 
and
    (4) Other advanced processes that will enable the development of 
cost-effective bioproducts, including biofuels.''
    Section 932(d) provides that ``the Secretary shall carry out a 
program to demonstrate the commercial application of integrated 
biorefineries. The Secretary shall ensure geographical distribution of 
biorefinery demonstration under this subsection. The Secretary shall 
not provide more than $100,000,000 under this subsection for any single 
biorefinery demonstration. In making awards under this subsection, the 
Secretary shall encourage--
    (A) The demonstration of a wide variety of lignocellulosic 
feedstocks;
    (B) The commercial application of biomass technologies for a 
variety of uses, including--
    i. Liquid transportation fuels;
    ii. High-value biobased chemicals;
    iii. Substitutes for petroleum-based feedstocks and products; and
    iv. Energy in the form of electricity or useful heat; and
    (C) The demonstration of the collection of treatment of a variety 
of biomass feedstocks.''
    Section 932(d) further directs the Secretary to solicit proposals 
for demonstration of advanced biorefineries and to select only 
proposals that demonstrate economic viability without Federal subsidy 
after initial construction costs are paid and for projects that are 
replicable.
    In implementing section 932, DOE's goal is to demonstrate that 
commercial-scale integrated biorefineries that use a wide variety of 
lignocellulosic feedstocks (biomass), can operate profitably once 
constructed, and can be replicated. Lignocellulosic feedstock includes 
energy crops, corn fiber, wood wastes, agricultural wastes such as corn

[[Page 50002]]

stover, and certain municipal solid wastes. DOE notes that, while the 
refining process for ethanol from biomass is more complex than the 
refining process for ethanol derived from grain, cellulosic ethanol can 
yield a greater net energy benefit and result in lower greenhouse gas 
emissions.
    Accordingly, DOE issued a funding opportunity announcement for the 
construction and operation of commercial-scale integrated biorefineries 
intended to demonstrate the use of a wide variety of cellulosic 
feedstocks. On February 28, 2007, DOE announced the selection of six 
biorefinery projects for negotiation of financial assistance awards. In 
that announcement, DOE proposes to invest up to $385 million in the six 
projects over the next four years.
    Abengoa Bioenergy Biomass of Kansas, LLC (ABBK) of Chesterfield, 
Missouri, was one of the six applicants competitively selected for 
negotiation of award under DOE's funding opportunity announcement. 
Abengoa proposed an innovative approach to biorefinery operations that 
involves production of a biofuel and of energy in the form of steam 
that can be used to meet energy needs and displace fossil fuels such as 
coal and natural gas. In addition, siting the facility in Kansas would 
qualify Abengoa for state tax credits for biofuels, which would make 
the biorefinery a more viable commercial operation.
    DOE granted an initial award to ABBK to advance the conceptual 
design; to initiate the permitting process; and to support an 
environmental review under NEPA for ABBK's proposed biomass-to-ethanol-
and-energy facility near Hugoton, KS. DOE requires that ABBK fulfill 
these design, permitting, and environmental review obligations prior to 
deciding whether to cofund the construction and operation phase of the 
project. The total anticipated cost of this initial work is $37.5 
million of which DOE is funding 40% ($15 million) and ABBK is providing 
60% ($22.5 million).
    As described below, DOE is now proposing to negotiate a second 
financial assistance agreement for approximately $61 million for the 
construction and operation of the biomass to ethanol facility, whose 
anticipated total cost is approximately $190.5 million.
    ABBK is also planning to construct and operate a traditional grain-
to-ethanol production facility at the same site that would integrate 
the biomass-to-ethanol facility into the overall facility. This grain-
to-ethanol facility would use a traditional starch conversion process 
to produce ethanol from grain feedstocks (sorghum or corn) along with 
distillers grains with solubles, which is a product. While the 
traditional grain-to-ethanol facility would be constructed and operated 
with private funds, DOE plans to analyze the traditional grain-to-
ethanol facility as a connected action in the EIS.
    Proposed Action: DOE is proposing to provide approximately $61 
million in Federal funding to ABBK for the construction and operation 
of a commercial-scale biomass-to-ethanol and energy facility near 
Hugoton, KS. The total estimated cost (beyond the initial award) for 
construction and operation of the biomass-to-ethanol portion of the 
project is approximately $190.5 million.
    The biomass-to-ethanol facility would process 400 dry metric tons 
per day of biomass to produce approximately 12 million gallons per year 
(MGPY) of denatured ethanol. The biomass-to-ethanol facility would 
utilize an enzymatic hydrolysis process for converting biomass 
feedstocks to ethanol and co-products, and a gasification technology to 
convert biomass to synthesis gas. Biomass feedstock would be supplied 
from waste products from the production of crops produced within a 30 
mile radius of the facility, and may include sorghum stubble, corn 
stover, switchgrass, and other opportunity feedstocks that are 
available in the area.
    The traditional grain-to-ethanol process would use 32 million 
bushels of grain (sorghum and corn) to produce approximately 88 MGPY of 
denatured ethanol annually, two-thirds of which (i.e. that derived from 
sorghum) would qualify as Advanced Biofuels under Section 207 of the 
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) (Per EISA, Advanced 
Biofuels includes all biofuels except corn-based ethanol). Solids from 
the process will be converted to animal feed, resulting in the 
production of up to 781,800 tons per year wet distillers grain with 
solubles (WDGS). The facility will have the capability to dry up to 50 
percent of the WDGS, producing a maximum of 152,000 tons per year of 
dried distiller's grains with solubles (DDGS). The difference between 
the two sources of animal feed is moisture; DDGS contains approximately 
10 percent moisture while WDGS contains approximately 65 percent 
moisture.
    The overall integrated biorefinery, comprising both the proposed 
biomass-to-ethanol facility and the grain-to-ethanol facility, would be 
capable of producing about 100 MGPY of denatured ethanol and would be 
located on approximately 800 acres, which includes the combined 
facility footprint of about 385 acres and a buffer area between the 
proposed biorefinery and the City of Hugoton to the east. Hugoton has a 
population of about 3,700 and is located in Stevens County in southwest 
KS. Land use in the area is primarily agricultural in nature with 
cropland being the dominant use and grassland being the secondary use. 
The area has diverse biomass feedstocks, numerous large cattle 
feedlots, and a variety of grains grown locally.
    The project site itself currently consists of row-cropped 
agricultural land and is adjoined by grain elevators, an asphalt plant, 
industrial park, and airport to the south; golf course and agricultural 
land to the west; two residences to the northwest; and agricultural 
cropland to the north. About 65 % of the site would qualify as prime 
farmland if it were irrigated. The proposed biorefinery site and 
additional buffer area to the east are currently zoned Agricultural, 
but the biorefinery location is proposed for a change to Heavy 
Industrial zoning.
    Infrastructure required to operate the proposed biorefinery would 
include the following:
     Water, which would be supplied from wells on-site and near 
the project site utilizing water rights acquired from local owners;
     Electricity, which would be brought to the project site by 
Pioneer Electric from an existing substation located a few miles to the 
north of the project site;
     Natural gas, which would be brought through a lateral 
connection to one of the nearby interstate pipelines or through the 
local distribution company;
     Wastewater treatment--wastewater would be treated on-site, 
non-contact cooling water will be used for irrigation;
     Railroad service would be provided by the Cimarron Valley 
Short Line which runs adjacent to the project site; and
     Road access would be via a truck bypass route that the 
City of Hugoton intends to construct prior to the completion of the 
project.
    During construction, truck traffic to the site would be expected to 
average about 30 shipments a day. During operations, truck traffic 
would be expected to increase to about 470 shipments a day. Most of the 
grain and biomass would be obtained from growers located near the 
proposed facility, but about 8 million tons of grain would be shipped 
to the facility from non-local sources each year.
    Alternatives: NEPA requires that agencies evaluate reasonable 
alternatives to the proposed action in an EIS. To implement the 
requirements of

[[Page 50003]]

EPAct 2005, Section 932(d), in a separate, earlier proceeding DOE 
conducted a competitive solicitation. DOE received 24 applications in 
the response to the solicitation. Of these, nine did not comply with 
statutory requirements for eligibility under Section 932. DOE reviewed 
the remaining 15 applications on their merits and, having considered 
the objectives set forth in Section 932, selected six proposals, 
including ABBK's proposal for appropriate NEPA review. DOE selected 
ABBK's proposal for negotiation of a funding agreement in part because 
of its particular scale, location, and technology.
    DOE will consider reasonable only alternatives to the proposed 
action that meet its purpose and need. Accordinly, DOE proposes to 
analyze the following alternatives in detail in the EIS: (1) To provide 
federal funding for the Abengoa Biorefinery Project as proposed by ABBK 
(the Proposed Action); (2) to provide federal funding for the Abengoa 
Biorefinery Project contingent on implementation of environmental 
mitigation measures, which would be determined based on the 
environmental impact analysis in the EIS; and (3) to not provide 
federal funding for the proposed project (the No Action alternative).
    Preliminary Identification of Environmental Issues: The purpose of 
this Notice is to solicit comments and suggestions for consideration in 
the preparation of the EIS. As background for public comment, this 
Notice contains a list of potential environmental issues that DOE has 
tentatively identified for analysis. This list identifies resource 
areas that may be affected by construction and operation of the 
proposed Project and that DOE plans to analyze in the EIS. This list is 
not intended to be all-inclusive or to imply any predetermination of 
impacts. DOE welcomes comments on this list and other suggestions on 
the scope of the EIS.
    1. Water Resources: Potential impacts on surface and groundwater 
resources and water quality, including effects of water usage, 
wastewater management, storm water management.
    2. Potential impacts on apparent isolated wetlands at the project 
site.
    3. Utility and transportation infrastructure requirements for 
delivery of feedstocks and process chemicals to the facility and 
distribution of products from the facility to the marketplace.
    4. Land Use: Changes in land use, including the proposed site and 
the geographical area that will provide feedstock to the proposed 
facility.
    5. Local and Regional Air Quality.
    6. Cultural Resources: Including potential effects on historic and 
archaeological resources and Native American tribal resources.
    7. Ecological Resources: Terrestrial and aquatic plants and animals 
including state and Federally listed threatened and endangered species 
and other protected resources.
    8. Health and safety impacts: Including construction-related safety 
and process-related safety associated with handling and management of 
process chemicals.
    9. Noise: Potential impacts resulting from construction and 
operation of the proposed plant and from transportation of feedstocks, 
process materials, and plant byproducts.
    10. Socioeconomic impacts: Potential socioeconomic impacts of plant 
construction and operation, including effects on public services and 
infrastructure resulting from the influx of construction personnel and 
plant operating staff, and environmental justice issues.
    11. Aesthetic and scenic resources: Potential visual effects 
associated with plant structures and operations.
    12. Cumulative impacts that result from the incremental impacts of 
the proposed plant when added to the other past, present, and 
reasonably foreseeable future activities within the regions of 
influence. This may include potential impacts resulting from widespread 
replication of this type of technology.
    13. Global Climate Change: Potential greenhouse gas emissions and 
impacts on global climate change that may result from this project.
    Public Scoping Process: Interested agencies, organizations, Native 
American tribes, and members of the public are encouraged to submit 
comments or suggestions concerning the content of the EIS, including 
the range of reasonable alternatives and the potential environmental 
impacts to be analyzed. DOE invites oral comments and suggestions at 
the public scoping meeting. The public scoping period will be open 
until October 9, 2008.
    Written comments should be sent to Kristin Kerwin as described in 
the ADDRESSES section of this Notice. The public scoping meeting will 
be held at the location, date, and time listed in the DATES and 
ADDRESSES sections of this notice. This meeting will be informal. A 
presiding officer designated by DOE will establish procedures governing 
the conduct of the meeting and an overview of the proposed Project will 
be provided. The meeting will not be conducted as an evidentiary 
hearing, and those who choose to make statements will not be cross-
examined by other speakers. However, DOE representatives may ask 
speakers questions to help ensure that DOE fully understands their 
comments or suggestions. To request time to speak at the meeting, 
please contact Kristin Kerwin via telephone, mail, fax or e-mail as 
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Notice. Persons may also sign 
up to speak before the meeting at the reception desk at the entrance to 
the meeting and will be provided opportunities to speak after 
previously scheduled speakers have spoken, as time allows. To ensure 
that everyone who wishes to speak has a chance to do so, five minutes 
will be allotted to each speaker. Depending on the number of persons 
requesting to speak, DOE may allow longer times for representatives of 
organizations. Persons wishing to speak on behalf of an organization 
should identify that organization when they sign up to speak.
    A complete transcript of the public scoping meeting will be 
retained by DOE and made available to the public for review via the 
Golden Field Office Online Public Reading Room at: http://www.eere.energy.gov/golden/Reading_Room.aspx and during business hours 
at the Department of Energy, Freedom of Information Reading Room, 
Forrestal Building, Room 1E-90, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0001. Additional copies of the public scoping 
meeting transcripts will be made available during business hours at the 
following location: Stevens County Library, 500 S. Monroe Street, 
Hugoton, Kansas 67951.
    Draft EIS Schedule and Availability: The draft EIS is scheduled to 
be issued in late 2008. The availability of the draft EIS will be 
announced in the Federal Register and local media. The draft EIS will 
be made available for public inspection at the location listed above 
and on the Internet. Comments on the Draft EIS will be considered in 
preparing the Final EIS.
    Interested parties who do not wish to submit comments at this time, 
but who would like to receive a copy of the draft EIS should contact 
Kristin Kerwin as provided in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on this 19th day of August, 2008.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. E8-19633 Filed 8-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P