MEMORANDUM

DATE: 11/21/14

FROM: Ken Mitchell/EPA Region 4

TO: Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR–2013-0602

SUBJECT: Discussion of the Clean Power Plan with the Georgia Environmental Protection Division

SUMMARY: 

Region 4 provided information on the Clean Power Plan to the Georgia Environmental 

Protection Division on August 13, 2014. The Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was 

proposed on June 2, 2014. 

ATTENDEES:

EPA

Beverly Banister/EPA R4

Carol Kemker/EPA R4

Jeaneanne Gettle/EPA R4

Ken Mitchell/EPA R4

David McNeal/EPA R4

David Solomon/EPA OAQPS

Lisa Conner/EPA OAQPS

Elineth Torres/EPA OAQPS

Julia Miller/EPA OAP

Erika Wilson/EPA OAP

Erich Eichmann/EPA OAP

Matt Clouse/EPA OAP

Other EPA Staff

External Stakeholders

Albert Pierce/GA EPD

Karen Hays/GA EPD

Mary Walker/GA EPD

Keith Bentley/GA EPD

Jud Turner/GA EPD

ATTACHMENT
Advance Questions for Discussion of the Clean Power Plan with the Georgia Environmental Protection

Division on 8/13/14

Subject Question 

Dispatch to Natural 

Gas CC

Dispatch is currently performed based on economics. What regulatory 

mechanism does EPA anticipate states using to require utilities to give 

priority to CO2 emissions over cost? Implementation of a minimum 

dispatch requirement for NGCC would have significant impacts on our 

publically-owned utilities and their customers (Oglethorpe Power and 

MEAG Power). 

Renewable 

generation – basis 

for SE target of 10 %

The SE target of 10% was set based on the NC standard, which covers 

both RE and EE generation as opposed to RE only. Is the basis for the 

10 % assignment technically correct? 

Renewable 

generation – credit 

to generator or 

purchaser

Who gets credit for renewable power purchased out-of-state? The 

state purchasing or the state with the generation? Has EPA changed 

their position on the answer previously given (which was the state 

purchasing the power gets the credit)? How are wind and solar 

quantified for calculation of emissions performance? Are there 

enforceable compliance mechanisms other than an RPS or EERS?

Modeling Can EPA’s modelers work with our modelers so that we can evaluate 

the modeling runs that EPA did? We would like to see the output files 

in an understandable format and be walked through the modeled 

compliance scenario.

Mass-based goal SE states have requested a webinar from EPA Region 4. The current 

discussion of methodology in TSD is inadequate. Does EPA plan to 

calculate an equivalent mass goal for each state and when might we 

expect to see it? If EPA is not doing the conversion calculation, when 

will EPA provide detailed guidance?

Is switching from rate-based goal to mass-based goal allowed? How 

and when and how often? Would you have to submit a plan revision 

every time you switched? 

Plan flexibility Many aspects of the energy infrastructure and technology will 

undoubtedly change between now and 2030. States will need some 

mechanism to adapt our plan to accommodate those changes relatively 

quickly (i.e. not a 2 year review process). How does EPA envision this 

working?

Emissions Rule 60.5770(a)(3): (a)(3) The conversion must represent the tons of 
Performance Level 

(60.5740)

CO2 emissions that are projected to be emitted, in the absence of 

emissions standards contained in the plan, if the affected EGUs were to 

perform at an average lb CO2 /MWh rate equal to the rate-based goal 

for the state identified in Table 1 of this Subpart. 

- Georgia’s rate-based goal is 834 while our coal emissions rate 

(after HR improvement) and NGCC emissions rate are 2157 and 

841 lbs/MWh, respectively. Even if we dropped coal generation 

to 0, we would be left with an equivalent emissions rate of 

841. This would fail the equivalency test in paragraph 

(a)(3). No state that operates coal-fired EGUs and has a goal 

below 900 lbs/MWh would be able to meet the requirement as 

stated. Please clarify.

Other questions:

1. How can a state account for or adjust in the event that a zero emission IPP either shuts down or 

does not reach expected capacity say in 2025?

2. Does EPA have a planned approach for dealing with some type major disruption in the energy 

markets that may occur in the future? Same question for an unexpected shutdown of an existing 

nuclear plant?

3. What does a federal state plan look like?

4. If two or more states request the two year extension to develop a multistate program and 

despite good faith efforts, the plan is not completed, how will EPA react and what will the path 

forward be for the states involved?

5. A state plan will be based on achieving certain levels of HRI, natural gas dispatch, RE, EE, 

assumed capacity factors for various fuel types and other methods that reduce carbon. Will the 

state be held accountable to meet each component of the plan or simply to meet the final goal?

6. Why did EPA include an interim goal, and why is it so close the final goal? Can states propose an 

alternative interim goal as long as the final goal is reached in 2030?

7. Can a new source be included as an affected unit for 111(d)?