From : "Pugh, Theresa" < TPugh@publicpower.org > To: Lanelle Wiggins/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, " bmu@bancroftiow a.com " < bm u@bancroftiowa.com >, " scott.siddow ay@rosi

- boise.com " < scott.siddow ay@rosi

- boise.com >, " rex.butler@cipco.net " < rex.butler@cipco.net >, " crmugas@crmu.net " < crmugas@crmu.net >, " mi ke.thatcher@cbpower.coop " < mi ke.thatcher@cbpower.coop >, " dhaverland@dutil.com " < dhaverland@dutil.com >, " lopsal@cityofgeneseo.com " < lopsal@cityofgeneseo.com >, " dnally@hollandbpw.com " < dnally@hollandbpw .com >, " skulig@jamestownbpu.com " < skulig@jame stownbpu.com >, " ebooth@mblp.org " < ebooth@mblp.org >, " mo ntelp@zumatel.net " < mo ntelp@zumatel.net >, " dpauken@mp w. org " < dpauken@mpw.org >,
" jeutizi@smeci.net " <

jeutizi@smeci.net >,
" lhopkins@sipower.org " < lhopkins@sipow er.org >,
" joe@tonducorp.com " <

joe@tonducorp.com >,
" kbabb@texasmpa.org " < kbabb@texasmpa.org >,
" jfrench@wyan.org " <

jfrench@wyan.org >,
" ms hook@coffeyville.com " < mshook@coffeyville.com >,
" WPenrod@sunflower.net " < WPenrod@sunflower.net >,
" kbihm@lepa.com " < kbihm@lepa.com > Cc: " mrossler@eei.org " < mrossler@eei.org >, " ec@jecinc.info " < ec@jecinc.info >, " rae.cronmiller@nreca.coop " < rae.cronmiller@nreca.coop >, " afield@hunton.com " < afield@hunton.com >, Caryn Muellerleile/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, "Wehrum, William L." < wwe hrum@hunton.com >, RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Nipper, Joe" < JNipper@publicpower.org >, "Spooner, Brad" < bspooner@meagpower.org >, " Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov " < Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov >, "Voyles, Seth" < svoyles@publicpower.org > Date: 07/06/2011 02:22 PM Subject: NRECA/APPA fol low up with suggestions for EPA's July 13 NSPS meeting July 6, 2011 Ms. Lanelle Bembenek Wiggins RFA/SBREFA Team Leader U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Policy 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (1806A) Washington, DC 20460 Dear Ms. Wiggins:
G ood afternoon. On behalf of the Small Entity Representatives (SER) for the NSPS for the electric generation sector (EGU

- NSPS for CO2) group w e write to make several suggestions. We believe that the proposal of an NSPS in September should be delayed until the SER panel spends considerable time discussing regulatory options for various sizes, types, a variety of fuels and ages of plants. We don’t think that the last meeting even scratched the surface. We think that it could have been mo re useful to discuss specific efficiency opportunities with different types of generation technology. We note that, as of July 6, 2011, w e have received no agenda or listing of specific regulatory alternatives identifying options on fuel types, generation types, or ages of pl ant. In light of the general discussionsregarding the June 17, 2011 meeting, w e would like to make some recommendations. We believe that these recommendations will enable the U. S. EPA staff (and contractors) to make better decisions regarding least cost or less burdensome regulatory options. Although the U. S. EPA has not offered specific regulatory alternatives (as requested and as is the standard for a SER panel), w e do believe, based upon your slides, that a pounds/mwH has been informally implied by y our staff. On behalf of the participants, we suggest the following issues to be added to the agenda for July 13th assuming that you intend to proceed wi th the SER meeting. If the EPA had already planned a full day’s program, then we w ould like to suggest that these topics be added to the meeting. If needed, w e suggest that you add a third day to the SER process to make certain that these topics are included in the SER panel. (As you might recall, APPA requested 4 or 5 SER meetings to discuss NSPS for CO2 a nd other GHGs).

• Limited use boilers with limited opportunities for efficient im provements due to NSR complications for conventional pollutants (even though we believe that the pollution control exclusion applies in the context of NSPS) (30 minutes )

• Variances per kwH and heat rates over monthly and annual operations (six real world case studies by utilities totaling 45 mi nutes)

• Why age of plant is significant in setting any NSPS for CO2 (Wy andotte) (1hour) (if speaker is available b y phone or in person)

• A brief presentation on legal issues on NSPS for CO2 (Bill Wehrum) (30 minutes)

• Why knowing the end game on biomass is critical before proposing NSPS for EPA and utilities (Holland) (30 minutes)

• Why municipal government electric utilities are different from other utilities. Examples: why the business model is based upon cost

- effective decisions that integrate wastewater treatment waste combustion, etc. Why waste heat for snow melt and community energy plan prov ides high temperature for high temperature water in buildings to reduce CO2 used from heating of water, etc (Holland) (30 minutes) These recommendations, totaling about 4 hours, should improve the SBERFA SER process significantly given the importance of a NSPS for the pow er sector and your impending September 30th deadline. Thank yo u for your consideration. Thank you, (approval given for electronic signature by e

- mail)
Rae Theresa Rae Cronmiller Theresa Pugh NRECA APPA Sent by: Theresa Pugh Director, Environmental Services APPA 1875 Connecticut Ave, NW Suite 1200 Washington, D. C. 20009 202 467 2943 (direct) 202

- 495

- 7443 personal fax number Note new e

- mail address: 

### mailto:TPugh@publicpower.org TPugh@publicpow er.org