Rulemaking for Greenhouse Gas 

Emissions

from Electric Utility Generating Units

Update Briefing, February 26, 2014
Agenda

► President’s Climate Action Plan

► Affected Sources

► Section 111(b) and (d) Overview

► Stakeholder Outreach

► Modified Sources

► Reconstructed Sources

► Existing Sources

► Questions/Comments

► Appendix A – State & Local Governments Potentially Subject 

to Regulation

2
Reducing Carbon Pollution from Power Plants

The President’s Directive to EPA: 

► Set flexible carbon pollution standards, regulations or guidelines, as 

appropriate, for power plants under section 111 of the Clean Air Act

► Focus on the following elements when developing the standards and 

guidelines

► Stakeholder engagement on program design

► Flexibilities in the program design

► Costs

► Continued importance of relying on a range of energy sources

► Other regulations that affect the power sector

3
EPA’s Task: Using the Clean Air Act Authority

1. Issue carbon pollution standards for new power plants

► Proposal published in the Federal Register on January 8, 

2014

• Informed by the more than 2.5 million comments received 

on the April 2012 proposal

• Reflects recent developments and trends in the power 

sector

• Public hearing held in Washington, DC on February 6, 2014

– Over 150 people testified in 2 concurrent sessions –

representing industry, environmental groups, faith groups 

and the general public

• Comments may be submitted through March 10, 2014

2. Issue carbon pollution standards for modified and 

reconstructed power plants

► Proposal: June 2014

► Final: June 2015

4
3. Issue carbon pollution guidelines for existing power plants

► Issue federal guidelines for states

• Work in partnership with states

• States will develop plans that set standards for existing sources

• States use EPA guidelines as a reference

► Federal guidelines should build on states’ leadership and 

experience with programs that reduce GHGs

► Proposal: June 2014

► Final: June 2015

► States submit implementation plans to EPA: June 2016

EPA’s Task Using the Clean Air Act Authority (cont.)

5
Affected Sources

► Fossil fuel-fired steam generating units and integrated 

gasification combined cycle (IGCC) units that:

► Have a design heat input greater than 73 MW (250MMBtu/h) 

heat input of fossil fuel (either alone or in combination with any 

other fuel);

► Combust fossil fuel for more than 10% percent of the average 

annual heat input during a 3-year rolling average basis; and

► Were constructed for the purpose of supplying, and supply, onethird or more of its potential electric output and more than 

219,000 MWh net-electric output to a utility distribution system 

on an annual basis

► Fossil fuel means natural gas, petroleum, coal, and any form of 

solid, liquid or gaseous fuel derived from such material for the 

purpose of creating useful heat

6
Affected Sources (cont.)

► Natural gas-fired stationary combustion turbines that:

► Have a design heat input to the turbine engine greater than 73 

MW (250 MMBtu/h);

► Combust over 90% natural gas on a heat input basis on a 3-year 

rolling average basis; and

► Were constructed for the purpose of supplying, and supply, onethird or more of its potential electric output and more than 

219,000 MWh net-electrical output to a utility distribution 

system on a 3-year rolling average basis

7
Affected Sources (cont.) 

► ≈ 1,212 utility boilers at 536 facilities

► ≈ 827 coal-fired boilers at 373 facilities

► ≈ 33 oil-fired boilers at 17 facilities

► ≈ 352 gas-fired boilers at 172 facilities

► 4 IGCC plants currently operating in the U.S.

► ≈ 1,516 stationary combustion turbines at 526 facilities

► Includes investor-owned, publicly-owned and rural 

cooperative EGUs

► 175 state/local jurisdictions are estimated to own EGUs that may 

be affected by this action

► See Appendix A for list of potentially impacted state/local 

jurisdictions

8
Power Plants Covered by the EGU GHG Rule

9

Source: National Electric Energy Data System (NEEDS 5.13) (EPA, November 2013)

Note: This map displays facilities that are included in the NEEDS 5.13 database and that contain at least one coal, oil or gas-fired steam generating unit, or combustion turbine that generates more than 

25 megawatts of power. This includes coal-fired units that burn petroleum coke and that turn coal into gas before burning (using integrated gasification combined cycle or IGCC). NEEDS reflects 

available capacity on-line by the end of 2015; this includes committed new builds and committed retirements of old units. In areas with a dense concentration of facilities, the facilities on the map may 

overlap and some may be impossible to see. 
Clean Air Act Section 111

► Authorized in 1970 

► Establishes a mechanism for controlling air pollution from 

stationary sources 

► Applies to sources for which the Administrator, in her judgment, 

finds “causes, or contributes significantly to, air pollution which 

may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or 

welfare”

► Can apply to new, existing, modified and reconstructed sources

► More than 70 stationary source categories and subcategories 

are currently regulated under section 111

► A full list of sources regulated under section 111 can be found 

in 40 CFR Part 60

10
CAA Section 111(b) for Modified & Reconstructed Sources

► Federal standards for reconstructed and modified sources are set 

following the same process used to set standards for new sources

► Standards reflect the degree of emission limitation achievable through 

the application of the best system of emission reduction (BSER) that the 

Administrator determines has been adequately demonstrated

► EPA may distinguish among classes, types and sizes of sources

► In determining BSER, EPA may take into account:

• Technical feasibility of the system

• Implementation costs

• Amount of emission reductions

• Promotion of advanced technology

► Modification – a physical change that increases the source’s maximum 

achievable hourly rate of emissions

► Reconstruction – when a single project replaces components and 

exceeds 50 percent of the fixed capital cost that would be required to 

construct a comparable entirely new facility, and it is technologically 

and economically feasible to meet the applicable standards

11
CAA Section 111(d) for Existing Sources

► Emission guidelines for existing sources are set by EPA

► Different approach for achieving emission reductions than the 

approach used for new, reconstructed and modified sources

► EPA establishes (1) a procedure for states to issue performance 

standards for existing sources and (2) guidance about the 

appropriate level of the standard

► EPA has established section 111(d) regulations for 5 source 

categories 

• Sulfuric acid plants (acid mist)

• Phosphate fertilizer plants (fluorides)

• Primary aluminum plants (fluorides)

• Kraft pulp plants (total reduced sulfur)

• Municipal solid waste landfills (landfill gases)

12
CAA Section 111(d) for Existing Sources (cont.)

► Emission guidelines (cont.)

► Common elements of past guidelines

• Description of Best System of Emission Reduction (BSER) that has been 

adequately demonstrated

• Degree of emission limitation achievable, costs and environmental impacts 

of application

• Time required to implement

• Other information to facilitate development of state plans

• A goal for reductions – or “standard of performance” – based on a BSER 

analysis

► Section 111(d) is broad by design

► Recognition that existing sources do not have as much flexibility as 

new ones to build emission controls into their design

► Provides greater flexibility to EPA and states to design a program in 

consultation with a diverse range of stakeholders

13
CAA Section 111(d) for Existing Sources (cont.)

► How section 111(d) has worked:

► Previously established guidelines have not prescribed technology 

that must be used to comply

► Once EPA set the guidelines, states developed section 111(d) plans 

establishing standards of performance for the covered sources in 

their state

► States submitted section 111(d) plans to EPA for review and 

approval

► After evaluating the plans, EPA took action through notice and 

comment rulemaking

► EPA has authority to prescribe a plan for a state in cases where the 

state fails to submit a satisfactory plan and to enforce the provisions 

of a plan in cases where the state fails to enforce them

14
CAA Section 111(d) for Existing Sources (cont.)

► How state plans have worked:

► States determine the combination of measures that will meet the 

guidelines

► State plans set standards of performance

• Can be identical to EPA’s guidelines

• Can differ from, but be equivalent to, EPA’s guidelines

► State plans provide for implementation and enforcement

• States have had flexibility when applying the standard of performance 

in their plans to take into consideration, among other factors, the 

remaining useful life of the source

► Timeframe to submit state plans has been set by EPA in the 

guidelines

15
Stakeholder Outreach

► EPA has engaged in extensive stakeholder outreach

► Will inform the emission guidelines and standards development

► EPA held 11 public listening sessions in October & November 2013

• More than 1,600 people spoke

► EPA provided multiple opportunities to engage with each state

• EPA officials met with state leaders, including governors, 

environmental commissioners, energy officers, public utility 

commissioners and air directors

► Other stakeholders EPA officials have met with include:

• Electric utility associations

• Electric grid operators

• Labor unions

16
Stakeholder Outreach (cont.)

► Other stakeholders (cont.):

• Leaders representing large and small industries

– Utilities and utility industry representatives

– Energy industry representatives (e.g., coal and natural gas interests)

– Companies offering technologies to reduce/prevent carbon pollution 

(e.g., renewable energy and energy efficiency interests)

– Representatives of energy intensive industries (e.g., iron and steel, 

and aluminum)

• Environmental justice organizations

• Environmental groups

• Religious organizations

► EPA established a new email account called “Carbon Pollution 

Input” to which over 2,000 emails providing stakeholder input 

have been submitted

17
Stakeholder Outreach (cont.)

► Key messages from stakeholders

► Broad agreement that opportunities exist to lower the carbon emissions of 

power generation through a wide range of measures

• Measures implementable at the source

• Measures implementable across the broader power generation system

► Multiple opinions about how broader system measures could factor into 

programs

• System-wide measures factored into the goals EPA establishes

• System-wide measures allowed for compliance, but not factored into goals

► Varied views regarding form and stringency of standards

• Rate-based versus mass-based

• Provide states flexibility to choose among multiple forms of the goals or to set 

their own goals

• Goal stringency should vary by state to account for different circumstances

18
Stakeholder Outreach (cont.)

► Key messages (cont.)

► General support for giving states flexibility

• Recognize existing programs and achievements in reducing CO2 emissions

– Allow state plans to take into account the reductions already achieved 

• Allow compliance options that permit the use of approaches that are outside 

the facility fence line (e.g., demand-side management)

► Broad agreement that states need more time to develop and submit plans

• Necessary due to legislative/regulatory schedule in many states

• Would allow and promote multi-state and regional programs and cooperation

► Support for flexibility in the timing of state plan implementation and 

compliance with goals

• Accommodates diverse CO2 reduction potential

• Supports approaches that are more cost-effective

► General concern that rulemaking could have negative impacts on: 

• Jobs and ratepayers

• Reliability of power

• Utilities (e.g., stranded generation assets)

19
Modified Sources

► Trigger: Physical change that results in an increase in the 

maximum potential hourly emission rate

► Potential regulatory approaches

► Boilers/IGCC units

• EGU case-specific numerical standard

• National standard

► Combustion turbines

• Numerical standard

► EPA doesn’t project any modified EGUs

► Historically, few EGUs have notified EPA that they have modified - an 

increase in the hourly rate for pollutants most often results from an 

increase in the ability to combust fuel

► Increases in a pollutant that are a result of the installation of a 

pollution control technology are not considered NSPS modifications 

(pollution control project exemption)

20
Reconstructed Sources

► Trigger: Fixed capital cost of the new components for a single 

project must exceed 50 percent of the fixed capital cost that 

would be required to construct a comparable new facility

► Potential regulatory approaches

► Boilers/IGCC units

• Efficiency standard based on combustion technology

• Considering separate standards based on EGU size

► Combustion turbines

• Numerical standard

► EPA doesn’t project any reconstructed EGUs

► Aware of one EGU that has triggered reconstruction and it was the 

result of an industrial accident (Hawthorn Power Plant in Kansas 

City, MO)

21
Existing Sources

► Emission guidelines will set state-specific goals

► Goals will likely be rate-based

► States would be able to convert to mass-based goals

► Would provide flexibility and accommodate existing state massbased programs

► Goals would not include an assumption of CCS

► State plans including CCS would get credit for it

► Setting goals – Potential design approaches

► Source-based approach

• Emission reduction measures that could be taken directly by power 

plants

► System-based approach

• Broader portfolio of measures including those taken beyond power 

plants but still reduce emissions at power plants 

22
Existing Sources (cont.)

► Setting goals – Potential options to reduce emissions

► Supply-side options

• Actions at power plants that reduce/avoid CO2 emissions

– Heat rate improvements/energy efficiency at the EGU

– Fuel switching to a lower-emitting fuel or co-firing with a lower-emitting 

fuel

– Re-dispatch of EGUs based on CO2 emission rate

– Renewable energy portfolio requirements

► Demand-side options

• Actions at locations where electricity is used, as well as transmitted 

and distributed, that lower electricity demand

– End-use energy efficiency requirements and programs

– Demand-side management programs

23
Existing Sources (cont.)

► Approach for state plans -- considerations

► Timing of submittals

► Use of existing state and multi-state programs

► Use of regional plans/partnerships

► Timing of reductions -- considerations

► States are at different stages in improving CO2 emissions 

► Time needed to attain emission reductions varies based on type of 

emission reduction measure used

► Time needed for legislative approval if required

24
Questions?

► Project/Program lead: Bob Wayland

• (919)541-1045

• wayland.robertj@epa.gov

► Technical leads: Christian Fellner

• (919)541-4003

• fellner.christian@epa.gov

Nick Hutson

• (919)541-2968

• hutson.nick@epa.gov

► Federalism Contact: Andrew Hanson

• (202)564-3664

• hanson.andrew@epa.gov

25
Appendix A

26
State & Local Governments Potentially Subject 

to Regulation

OWNERSHIP TYPE – MUNICIPAL tings Utilities (NE)

Alabama Municipal Electric Authority Chanute Municipal Electric Utility Floydada TX (City of)

Alexandria LA (City of) Chaska Public Utilities Freeport Inc (Village of)

Algona Municipal Utilities Chillicothe Municipal Utilities Fremont Department of Public Utilities

Alta IA (City of) Clarksdale Water & Light Department Gainesville Regional Utilities

American Municipal Power Inc. Coffeyville Municipal Light & Power Garland Power & Light

Ames Municipal Electric System Colorado Springs Utilities Geneseo Municipal Utilities

Anaheim CA (City of) Colton Electric Utility Department Gillette WY (City of)

Atlantic Municipal Utilities Columbia Water & Light Glendale Water & Power

Austin Energy Connecticut Municipal Electric Energy Coop Graettinger Municipal Light Plant

Austin Utilities Conway Corp Grand Haven Light & Power

Azusa CA (City of) Coon Rapids IA (City of) Grand Island Utilities

Bancroft Municipal Utilities CPS Energy Great Falls MT (City of)

Banning Electric Division Dalton GA (City of) Greenville Electric Utility System

Braintree Electric Light Department Delaware Municipal Electric Corp Hamilton Department of Public Utilities

Brownfield Municipal Power & Light Detroit Public Lighting Harlan Municipal Utilities

Brownsville Public Utility Board Dover DE (City of) Hastings Utilities (NE)

Bryan Texas Utilities Eldridge IA (City of) Henderson Municipal Power & Light

Burbank Water & Power Farmington NM (City of) Higginsville Municipal Utilities

Cedar Falls Utilities Fayetteville Public Works Commission Hingham Municipal Light Plant

Cerritos (City of) Florida Municipal Power Agency Holland Board of Public Works

27
State & Local Governments Potentially Subject 

to Regulation (cont.)

OWNERSHIP TYPE – MUNICIPAL tings Utilities (NE)

Holyoke Gas & Electric Department Laurens IA (City of) North Attleborough Electric Department

Hudson Light & Power Department Lincoln Electric System North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency

Hutchinson Utilities Commission Littleton MA (Town of) Northern Municipal Power Agency

Illinois Municipal Electric Agency Los Alamos County Omaha Public Power District

Imperial Irrigation District Los Angeles Department of Water & Power Orlando Utilities Commission

Independence MO (City of) Lubbock Power & Light Department Orrville OH (City of)

Independence Power & Light Lyndonville Electric Department Osceola AR (City of)

Indiana Municipal Power Agency Manitowoc Public Utilities Owensboro Municipal Utilities

Intermountain Power Agency Marquette Board of Light & Power Pasadena Water & Power Department

Jamestown Board of Public Utilities Marshfield Electric & Water Department Peabody Municipal Light Plant

JEA Massachusetts Bay Transmission Authority Ponca City OK (City of)

Jonesboro Water & Light McPherson Board of Public Utilities Provo City Corp

Kansas City Board of Public Utilities Michigan South Central Power Agency Redding Electric Utility

Keys Energy Services Milford Municipal Utilities Reedy Creek Improvement District

Kissimmee Utility Authority Montezuma Municipal Utilities Richmond Power & Light

Lafayette Utilities System Morgan City LA (City of) Riverside Public Utilities

Lake Worth Utilities Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia Rochester Department of Public Utilities

Lakeland Department of Electric Water Utilities Muscatine Power & Water Roseville Electric

Lamar Utilities Board Nebraska City Utilities Sacramento Power Authority

Lansing Board of Water & Light New Hampton Municipal Light Plant Santa Clara CA (City of)

28
State & Local Governments Potentially Subject 

to Regulation (cont.)

OWNERSHIP TYPE – MUNICIPAL

Santee Cooper West Bend IA (City of)

Sikeston Utilities West Memphis Utility Department

South Eastern Electric Development Corp. Winfield KS (City of)

Spencer Municipal Utilities WPPI Energy

Springfield MO (City of) Wyoming Municipal Power Agency

Springfield Water, Light & Power Department

St George Department of Water & Power

Sumner Municipal Light Plant

Tallahassee FL (City of)

Taunton Municipal Lighting Plant

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated

Texas Municipal Power Agency

Tipton IA (City of)

Tulia TX (City of)

Turlock Irrigation District

Utah Municipal Power Agency

Vero Beach Municipal Utilities

Vineland NJ (City of)

Waverly Light & Power

Webster City IA (City of)

29
State & Local Governments Potentially Subject 

to Regulation (cont.)

OWNERSHIP TYPE – STATE

California Department of Water Resources

Grand River Dam Authority

Lower Colorado River Authority

Michigan Public Power Agency

Missouri Joint Municipal Electric Utility Commission

New York Power Authority

Northern California Power Agency

Oklahoma Municipal Power Authority

OWNERSHIP TYPE – SUBDIVISION

Arkansas River Power Authority

Calhoun Port Authority

Connecticut Resource Recovery Authority

Heartland Consumers Power District

Kansas Power Pool

Kentucky Municipal Power Agency

Kings River Conservation District

Lafayette Public Power Authority

Louisiana Energy & Power Authority

Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co.

Missouri River Energy Services

Modesto Irrigation District

Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska

Nebraska Public Power District

Northern Illinois Municipal Power Agency

Platte River Power Authority

PUD No 1 of Clark County

Sacramento Municipal Utility District

Salt River Project

Southern Nevada Water Authority

Utah Associated Municipal Power System

Western Minnesota Municipal Power Agency

30