Commen ts, letters, and transcripts of the public hearings are also available electronically through

h ttp://www.regulations.gov by searching Docket ID EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2013

- 0602 

## EPA’s Responses to Public Comments on the EPA’s Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

August 2015i FOREWORD

This document provides the EPA’s responses to public comments on the EPA’s Proposed Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units . The EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register

on June 18 , 201 4 , at 79 F ed. R eg. 34830 . The EPA received comments on this proposed rule via mail, e

- mail, facsimile, and at four public hearings held in Atlanta, Georgia; Denver, Colora do; Pittsburgh, P ennsylvania ; and Washington, D.C. , in July and August 201 4

. The EPA published a Supplemental Proposal in the Federal Register on November 4, 2014, at 79 F ed. R eg. 65482.

The EPA received comments on the supplemental notice to this proposed rule via mail, e

- mail, facsimile, and a public hearing held in Phoenix, Arizona in November, 2014. Copies of all comments and transcripts for the public hearings for both actions are available at the EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room. Com ments and transcripts of the public hearings for both

actions are also available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov by searching Docket

ID EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 20 13

- 0 602

.

The EPA signed and announced the proposed rule on June 2, 2014, and the full text of the proposal was available for public review that same day on the EPA website (www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan). The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on June 18, 2014, 79 Fed. Reg. 34830, at which time the 120

- day public comment perio d began

, ending October 16 , 2014 . In response to stakeholder requests for additional time to review the proposal, the EPA extended the comment period by 45 days, to December 1, 2014. This comment period extension gave stakeholders additional time to review all elements of the proposal

— including the topics highlighted in the Notice of Data Availability (NODA), the notice “Additional Information Regarding the Translation of Emission Rate

- Based CO2 Goals to

Mass

- Based Equivalents" (79 Fed. Reg. 67406; November 13, 2014), and the technical support document (TSD) that provided two examples of how a state, area of Indian country, or territory

could translate its rate

- based goal to total metric tons of carbon dioxide (a mass

- based equivalent)

— and to submit their id eas and suggestions about the proposal, the notices

, and the

TSD. At the close of the comment period on December 1, 2014, the proposal had been available for public review for nearly six months ( 165 days)

.

Over 4 million public comments were received on the proposal and supplemental notice

. The

EPA Docket Center consolidated approximately 340 mass mail campaigns and petitions into single document control numbers ( DCNs ) , resulting in approximately 33,700 unique comments.

Each of these comments w as rev iewed and all significant comments have been summarized and

included in this document.

Separately, the EPA published Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units ( EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2013

- 0495 ) and Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Modified Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units ( EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2013

- 0603 ).

This document contains responses to comments on the Emission Guidelines only; responses to

comments on the NSPS ac tion are in a separate Response to Comments document. Thisii document contains a summary of all significant comments provided by each commenter

extracted from the original letter or public hearing transcript.

Due to the unprecedented number of comments, lists of document control numbers ( DCNs ) were not included with each comment summary. For purposes of this document, the text within the comment summaries was provided by the commenter(s) and represents their opinion(s), regardless of whether the summary specifically indicates that the statement is from a commenter(s) (e.g., “The commenter states” or “The commenters assert”). The comment summaries do not represent the EPA’s opinion unless the response to the co mment specifically agrees with all or a portion of the comment. In some cases the same comment was submitted by

two or more commenters through submittal of a form letter prepared by an organization, by the

commenter incorporating by reference the comments in another comment letter, or by the commenter providing identical or similar language independently. Rather than repeat these

comments for each commenter, the EPA has listed the comment only once.

Several of the EPA’s responses to comments are provided i mmediately following each comment summary. However, in instances where several commenters raised similar or related issues, the

EPA has grouped these comments together and provided a single response after the last comment summary in the group. In some case s, the EPA provided responses to specific comments or groups of similar comments in the preamble to the final rulemaking. Rather than repeating those responses in this document, the EPA has referenced the preamble or the appropriate technical support docum ent for a description of the analysis included in the final rule.

Many commenters requested that the remarks of other commenters be incorporated into their own comments on the proposed rule. Appendix A lists the commenters who have been referenced, follow ed by the number of commenters who asked to incorporate the referenced

commenters’ remarks.

M any commenters submitted comments to this rulemaking docket that were specific to the NSPS

action. Some commenters submitted a single DCN with comments on both rules, while others submitted a separate DCN specific to each action. Many commenters submitted identical

comments to both dockets. In order to reduce duplicative comments, we have removed from this

document comments associated with the NSPS action. For th is reason, the EPA encourages the public to read the Response to Comment document prepared for the NSPS action.

The Response to Comments Document, together with the preamble to the final Clean Power
Plan, presents the responses of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the more than four million public comments received on the proposed rule. The EPA has addressed all significant issues raised in the public comments.

As a result of changes made to the preamble and final rule prior to signature, and due to the volume of comments received, some responses in the Response to Comments Document may not reflect the language in the preamble and final rule in every respect. Where the response is in

conflict with the preamble

, the final rule or the legal memorandum , the language in the final preamble

, rule and the legal memorandum controls and should be used for purposes of understanding the scope, requirements, and basis of the final rule. In addition, due to the largeiii number of comments that addressed similar issues, as well as the volume of the comments received, the Response to Comments Document does not always cross

- reference each response to the commenter(s) who raised the particular issue involved. The responses presented in this document are intended to augment the responses to comments that appear in the preamble to the final rule or to address comments not discussed in that preamble. Although portions of the preamble to the final rule a re paraphrased in this document where useful to add clarity to responses, the preamble itself , along with the legal memorandum, remains the definitive statement of the rationale for the revisions adopted in the final rule. In many instances, particular

res ponses presented in the Response to Comments Document include cross references to responses on related issues that are located either in the preamble to the Clean Power Plan, the Technical Support Document s , or elsewhere in the Response to Comments Documen t. The unprecedented number of comments received required on the proposal may have resulted in errors or inconsistencies within the Response to Comment Document for the final Clean Power Plan. Within the Response to Comments document, where inconsistencies exist, responses to legal comments in Chapter 1 take precedence over other responses. All issues on which the EPA is taking final action in the Clean Power Plan are addressed in the Clean Power Plan rulemaking

record.

Accordingly, the Response to Comments Document, together with the preamble to the Clean Power Plan and the information contained in the Technical Support Documents, and the rest of the administrative record should be considered collectively as the agencies’ response to all of the sign ificant comments submitted on the proposed rule. The Response to Comments Document incorporates directly or by reference the significant public comments addressed in the preamble to the Clean Power Plan as well as other significant public comments that wer e submitted on the proposed rule.iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: LEGAL

1.1 Authori ty to regulate carbon dioxide

1 .2 Authority to regulate EGUs

1.3 Authority to reg ulate states' energy markets

1.4 Combined categories and codification in the CFR

1.5 Affected sources and applicability

1.6 Implications f or Tribes and U.S. Territories

1.7 Endangerment finding

1.8 Building blocks 2, 3, and 4: Intra

- sta te and inter

- state compliance

1.9 Potential combinations of the building blo cks as components of the BSER

1.10 Determination of the BSER

1.11 State Plan Enforceability Considerations

1.12 Promul gation of rules not proposed

1.13 CAA 307(d)

1.14 Request for ex tension of comment period

1.15 Other

C HAPTER 2: A PPLICABILITY

2.1 Overlap of Sections 111 (b) and 111(d)

2.2 Proposed Applicab ility vs. Broad Applicability

2.3 Applicability issues related to EGUs that fire biom ass or other non

- fossil fuels

2.4 Applicability issues related to combined heat and power (CHP)

2.5 Definition of Affected Source

2.6 Comment s regarding subcategorization

2.7 Other

CHA PTER 3 : GHG MITIGATION MEASURES

3.1 Heat Rate Improvement at Existing Coal

- fired EGUs (Building Block 1)

3.2 CO2 Reduction Potential from Generation Shifts A mong Affected EGUs (Building Block 2)

3.3 Cleaner Generation Sources (Building Block 3)

3.4 Demand

- side Energy Efficiency (EE)

3.5 Alternative RE Approach

3.6 In teraction of Building Blocks

3.7 Fuel Switching

3.8 Carbon Capture & Storagev 3.9 New NGCC capacity

3.10 Heat Rate reduction opportunities for non

- coal fossil fuel

- fired EGUs

3.11 Potential emission reduction measures no t used to set proposed goals

3.12 Other

CHAPTER 4: STATE GOAL COMPUTATION

4.1 Form of Goals

4.2 Proposed Goals

4.3 Alternate Goals

4.4 Computation Procedure

4. 5 Errors in 2012 Baseline Data

4.6 Rate

- to

- mass Conversion

4.7 State flexibilities

4.8 O ther goal

- setting approaches

4.9 Choice of Baseline Other than 2012

4.10 Tribe and Territory Goals from SNPR

4.11 State

- speci fic goal computation com ments
4.12 Other

CHAPTER 5 : STATE PLAN CONSIDERATIONS

5.1 State Plan Approaches

5.2 Incorporating end

- use energy efficiency and renewable energy programs and

measures under a rate

- based approach

5.3 Quantification, monitoring, and verification of end

- use energy effi ciency programs and measures

5.4 Quantification, monitoring, and verification for renewable energy programs and measures

5.5 Reporting and recordkeeping for end

- use energy effi ciency programs and measures

5.6 Reporting and recordkeepi ng for renewable energy programs and measures

5.7 T reatment of interstate effects

5.8 Projecting EGU CO2 Emission Performance

5.9 Treatment of existing st ate regulations and programs

5.10 Treatment o f New Fossil Fuel

- fired EGUs

5.11 Consideration of a facility's "remaining useful life" in apply ing standards of performance

5.12 Design, Equipment, Work Practice, or Oper ational Standards

5.13 Emi ssions averaging and trading

5.14 State

- specific I mplementation Considerations

5.15 Other

CHAPTER 6: STAT E PLANS

6.1 Timingvi 6.2 Criteria for Approving State Plans

6.3 State Plan Components

6.4 Process for St ate Plan Submittal and Review

6.5 Additional Factors

6.6 Resources

6.7 Other

CHAPTER 7 : INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER EPA PROGRAMS AND RULE S

7.1 EGU NSPS

- New

7.2 EGU NSP S

- Modified and Reconstructed

7.3 New Source Review (NSR)

7.4 Title V Program

7.5 40 CFR Part 75

7.6 Gree nhouse Gas Reporting Program

7.7 Other EPA Rules

7.8 Other

CHAPTER 8 : E CONOMIC AND EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS

8.0 Impacts and Costs

8.1 Baseline emissions

8.2 Emission Reductions

8.3 Endangered Species Act

8.4 Energy Impacts

8.5 Compliance Costs

8.6 Economic and Employment Impacts

8.7 Climate Benefits

8.8 Healt h and Air Quality Co

- Benefits

8.9 Rel iable affordable el ectricity

8.10 Other

CHAPTER 9 : STATUTORY AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS

9.1 Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive Order 13563: Improving Re gulation and Regulatory Review

9.2 Paperwork Reduction Act

9 .3 Regulatory Flexibility Ac t
9.4 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

9.5 Exec utive Order 13132: Federalism

9.6 Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination w ith Indian Tribal Governments

9.7 Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks

and Safety Risksvii 9.8 Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly

Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

9.9 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

9.10 Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmenta l Justice in Minority Populatio ns and Low

- Income Populations

CHAPTER 10 : RULE LANGUAGE CORRECTIONS

10.1 Definitions (exist ing)

10.2 Definitions (new)

10.3 Rule language

10.4 Other

CHAPTER 11 : GENERAL SU PPORT AND GENERAL OPPOSITION

11.1 General S upport
11.2 General Opposition

CHAPTER 12 : OTHER

APPENDIX A: CROSS

- REFERENCED COMMENTS