DHEC PROMOTtPROTECTPROSPER Catherine

B. Templeton,Direcwr Promoting and protecting the health
‘?!the public and the environment December

6, 2013 A. Stanley Meiburg, PhD, Acting Regional Administrator U.S. EPA Region

4 Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street SW Atlanta, GA 303-8909 Re: Comments
onSection 111(d) plans Dear Dr. Meiburg: The South Carolina Department
of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC)

is providing feedback
to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) onstate plans for the reduction of carbon dioxide from power plants under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). DHEC appreciates this opportunity

to provide feedback
toEPA before the proposal stageof this rulemaking. DHEC recommends state flexibility, attention
tolimits in state’s rulemaking timing, and the inclusion of all zero-emissions sources
in any possible averaging plans. Any framework which significantly regulates public utilities mustbe reasonable

in its approach, realistic with its deadlines, and not place unmanageable resourcecosts on customers, states, and utilities. EPA mustbe mindful that the powersector
is already subject
to non- environmental regulations

in South Carolina
to ensure grid reliability and is meeting other environmental regulations related tothe boiler MACT and the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. We request that EPA recognize ourstate’s leadership

in work that has been conducted since the announcement

of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan in June. Since that time DHEC has held multiple meetings with
adiverse groupof stakeholders (public utility commissions, energy office, reliability organizations, community groups,and utilities)

in aneffort to identify potential areasof concerns.We hope these efforts will identify what is tobe the backbone
of EPA’s proposed and final rulemaking and South Carolina’s 111(d) plan. We encourageEPA to pursuedue diligence
asthe final rule deadline approaches

toconsider the manydifferent perspectives gathered during the public comment period. We believe that done properly, EPA will draft

a proposal that fully utilizes the flexibility outlined in section 111(d) of the CAA. South Carolina utilities and its Electric Cooperatives have voluntarily implemented energy efficiency, demand-side management and renewable energy programsfor the past several years.While not necessarily specifically intended
to reduce carbon emissions, weare proud of the total emission reductions these efforts have achieved. These existing efforts (to include; pollution control equipment, use of lower emitting fuels, and clean energy investments, specifically nuclear capacity) should be recognized as quantifiable reductions

in carbon and ultimately extended

tothe state’s powersectorin the guidelines developed
by EPA. To this end, DE-IEC provides these initial comments and wewish tonotethat more input mayfollow. souyCAROl IN \ [)EPARTME\

Il HEALTH •\\i

I \VIRONMENTAL CONTROL 2(iLX)hullStiee

•Inluimhia.

S( 2)2()I

•Phniw:(803) 98—3132

•www.svdl’c.gnvSCD}{EC 111(d) Comments December

6, 2013 Page

2 First, DHEC recommends that EPA allow state flexibility

in implementing Section 111(d) of the CAA. States have different energy mixes, energyand environmental regulatory frameworks, and rulemaking requirements. While DHEC recommends flexibility

in the specific requirements

in state plans, DHEC also requests that EPA provide clarity oncertain implementation topics, such asthe relationship
of these plans toTitle V and New Source Review (NSR) permitting. Lack of attention
to these implementation details could stymie effective administration

of state plans. For example, utilities maybe hesitant
to expand energy efficiency programsbecause of the potential
to trigger Prevention
of Significant Deterioration

orNSR requirements

orthe lack of efficient tools to calculate and track reductions. Second, EPA should allow statestoinclude all sourcesof zero-emissions energyin state plans. Increased nuclear generation, for example, would have

adirect impact on generation

at fossil-fuel-fired power plants. The dispatch order would likely operate nuclear plants before fossil-fuel-fired plants. Any EPA emission guideline document should treat nuclear the sameasother zero-emissions sourcessuch as solar, wind, arid hydroelectric. Third, President Obama’s memorandum

toEPA that set upatimeline for 111(d) plans directs EPA to issue

afinal rule in June 2015 and require that statessubmit plans by June 2016. While DHEC plans to continue
tomeet with its stakeholders during this year,one yearis insufficient

to craft effective state plans, including developing plans based onfinal EPA guidance.
If South Carolina needs to develop regulations

asa partof a plan, the rulemaking process requires stakeholder involvement, governed by state statutes, which takes longer than one year.EPA must reconsider this one year requirement. DHEC recommends that
aNotice of Advanced Rule-Making

be provided
to help ensureaniterative process

is used to achieve the best goal for carbon reduction. We recommend providing additional opportunities
(by the Spring of 2014) for stakeholders

tounderstand and comment on proposed pathways that EPA is considering prior toanactual proposed rule’s moreformal comment period. South Carolina would like to commend EPA for yourcommitment

to working closely with statesand providing additional opportunities
for dialog and information exchange with other stakeholders. We greatly appreciate and value the time already spent by Jeaneanne Gettle, Carol Kemker and L-leadquarter’s Staff with South Carolina stakeholders who are key in the development

of South Carolina’s plan to address carbon emissions from existing power plants. Should youhave any questions
orconcerns regarding this information, please contact Robert Brown of mystaff by telephone

at (803) 898-4105
ore mail at I:Qwnrjdec.c.ggy. Sincerely, Y232. Myra C. Reece, Chief Bureau of Air Quality ec: Beverly Banister, US EPA Region

4 Jeaneanne Gettle, US EPA Region

4 Carol Kemker, US EPA Region

4 Scott Davis, US EPA Region

4 Lynorae Benjamin, EPA EPA Region

4 Todd Rinck. US EPA Region

4 C. Dukes Scott, S.C. Office of Regulatory Staff Ashlie Lancaster, S.C. Energy Office Elizabeth
A. Dieck, DHEC