This comment letter response contains two parts:

(1) The original submittal from the commenter.
(2) A data base printout of EPA’s response to each point raised by the commenter.

Notes about the response letters:

• The response letters were generated by a data base used to track the content of all public

comment submittals and ensure that the Agency responds to each. Each comment letter

was assigned a Letter ID that corresponds to the last four digits of the docket number of the

original comment (as posted on www.regulations.gov).

• Each response letter includes: comment text; an EPA

‐ assigned comment code; and an

individual response. These are described and explained below.

• The data base contains Comment text from the letters submitted by commenters.

Many hard copy letters were scanned into electronic format for inclusion in the data

base. As a result, there may be some typographical errors attributable to optical

character recognition issues. However, all original submittals were reviewed in the

process of drafting responses to ensure that the comment content was understood and

appropriately addressed.

• The content of each comment letter was divided into topic areas and assigned a unique

Comment ID. Additionally, one or more Comment Codes (i.e., unique topic area ID) was assigned to each discrete point raised by a commenter. This information was added to

the data base. To inform final rulemaking decisions, all comments and information

received on a given topic were reviewed by technical experts in each rule area (e.g., on

construction requirements).

• Following decisions on the final rule requirements, Individual responses were drafted

by topic area to ensure completeness and consistency of the responses with the final

rule and other responses to similar comments. Each discrete point made by a

commenter was given a unique response.

• Upon completion of comment responses, all information was entered into the data base.

Each letter response is a compilation of each comment and its individual response, compiled in the order of the original comment letter. As a result of this process, there is

repetition in the response text. The Agency believes this approach ensures completeness

and attention to each comment letter that was submitted.

• All comments in a topic area were reviewed, evaluated, and responded to concurrently.

Responses on each topic area are compiled and are also available in the rulemaking docket.T o:

T he U

. S

. E nvi r onm e nt a l P r ot e c t i on A ge nc y, O f f i c e of G r oundw a t e r a nd D r i nki ng W a t e r

F r om :

T he S i e r r a C l ub N a t i ona l G l oba l W a r m i ng a nd E n e r gy C om m i t t e e

, a nd

T he S i e r r a C l ub C a l i f o r ni a

- N e va da R e gi ona l C ons e r va t i on C om m i t t e e on E ne r gy

a nd C l i m a t e C h a nge

R e : D oc k e t I D N o. E P A

- H Q

- O W

- 2008

- 0390

P r opos e d F e de r a l R e gul a t i ons f or t he G e ol ogi c S e que s t r a t i on of C a r bon D i oxi de

S u m m ar y of R e c om m e n d a t i on s

I

. T e c h n i c al D e f i n i t i on s

A r e a of R e v i e w and F l ui d M ov e m e nt : A dopt t he s p e c i f

i c l anguage us e d by t he ad

- hoc

C O 2 w or k

gr oup i n i t s R e c om m e ndat i on 3. 1 f or de t e r

m i ni ng t he par am e t e r s of e ac h A r e a

of R e v i e w

, i

. e

. - - “ bas e d on ge ne r al l y ac c e pt e d an d s i t e r e l e v ant t e c hni que s

, s uc h as

m ode l i ng, t hat de f

i ne

, i n t hr e e di m e ns i ons

, t he m ax i m um e x t e nt of t he m ode l e d C O 2

pl um e [ i nc l us i v e of f

r e e phas e and w at e r

- di s s ol v e d C O 2 ] and as s oc i at e d pr e s s u r e f r ont

. ”

M e c hani c al I nt e gr i t y : I nc l ude t he t e r m M e c ha ni c a l I nt e gr i t y unde r t he phr as e s or i gi nal l y

de

f

i ne d at 40 C F

R § 146

. 81( d)

.

U

SD W s and E x e m pt e d A qui f

e r

s : R e

- e v al uat e t he U I

C pr ogr am ’ s c ur r e nt de f

i ni t i on of

U nde r gr ound S our c e of D r i nki ng W a t e r ( at 40 C F

R § 146

. 3)

, as app l i e d t o C r i t e r i a f or

E xe m pt e d A qui f e r s ( at 40 C F

R § 146

. 4)

, i n r e gar ds t o t he E P

A ’ s t ot al dis s ol v e d s ol i ds

(

T

D S) s t andar d of < 10, 000 m g / L

.2 I I

. R e gu l at or y O ve r s i gh t

R e gi onal A dv is or y B oar ds : E s t abl is h a C ar bon C a

pt ur e and Se que s t r at i on A dv is or y

B oar d f or e ac h of t he E P

A ’ s t e n r e gi onal of f

i c e s ( a c c or di ng t o gui de l i ne s unde r 40 C F

R

§ 25. 7)

, i n or de r t o opt i m al l y adm i nis t e r a “ T ai l or e d R e qui r e m e nt s A ppr oac h” t hat

appl i e s nat i onal s t andar ds w hi c h ar e adapt i v e t o a v ar i e t y of r e gi onal di f f

e r e nc e s i n

ge ol ogi c al f or m at i ons

, nat ur al r e s our c e s

, w e at he r pat t e r ns

, i ndus t r i al ope r at i ons

, and

appl i c abl e s t at e l aw s

.

“ V ul ne r abi l i t y E v al uat i on F r

am e w or k ” : E x

pand t he “ V u l

n e r abi l i t y E v a l ua t i on

F r am e w o r k ” t o i n c l ud e a m ul t i

- s c a l e d c l as s i f

i c a t i o n s c he m e f or adv e r s e i m pac ts

a s s oc i a t e d w i t h t h e c ap t ur e and t r an s po r t a t i on o f C O 2 and t h e op e r at i ona l i n f

r a s t r uc t ur e

i n v o l v e d i n C O 2 s t or age

, s uc h as pi p e l i n e s

, r oad s

, bu i l d i ngs

, and w e l l c ons t r uc t i on.

F

e de r al P i pe l i ne St andar ds f or T r

ans por t i ng C O 2 : C o

- or di nat e w i t h t he U S C ongr e s s

and f e de r al age nc i e s t o adopt nat i ona l s t andar ds f or m at e r i al s r e qui r e m e nt s and

pe r f

or m anc e s p e c i f

i c at i ons i n pi pe l i ne s us e d t o t r an s m i t C O 2.

I I I

. P u b l i c A c c e p t an c e

P ub l i c P ar t i c i pa t i on : A dop t t h e e x i s t i ng r e qui r e m e nt s f or publ i c par t i c i pa t i on i n pr og r a m s

unde r t h e Sa f

e D r i n k i ng W at e r A c t a t 40 C F

R P ar t 25 and 40 C F

R P ar t 124

.

E

n v i r on m e n t a l J us t i c e and t h e S i t i ng o f I n

j e c t i on W e l l s : A c k now l e dg e t h e c l e ar po t e n t i a l

f

or e n v i r on m e nt a l j us t i c e i s s ue s t o b e i n v o l v e d i n t h e s i t i ng o f C l as s V I i n j e c t i on w e l l s

, and

f

or m ul a t e m andat or y pr ot o c o l s f or add r e s s i ng t hos e i s s ue s w i t h i n t h e p e r m i t t i ng pr oc e s s

.

C C S and a ‘ C l e an E n e r gy F u t ur e ’ : E n c o ur age pub l i c a c c e p t

an c e o f C C S b y e m pha s i z i ng i t

a s one par t o f a s t r at e g i c na t i ona l p l an f or e f f

e c t i ng a ‘ C l e an E n e r gy F u t ur e ’

.

C O 2 a s a V a l uab l e C om m odi t y : R e

- f

r am e pub l i c p e r c e p t i ons of C O 2 a s a ha z a r dou s

w a s t e m at e r i a l b y f und i ng C C S d e m on s t r at i on p r oj e c t s w h i c h b i o l og i c a l l y or c h e m i c a l l y

t r an s f

or m C O 2 i n t o v a l uab l e pr oduc t s

.3 I n t r od u c t i on

T he S i e r r a C l ub a ppr e c i a t e s t hi s oppo r t uni t y t o c o m m e nt on t he E P A ’ s pr opos e d

r e gul a t i ons ( a t 40 C F R P a r t s 144 & 146 ) f or t he g e ol ogi c s e que s t r a t i on of c a rbon

d i oxi de

, a s f a c i l i t a t e d by t he A ge nc y’ s c r e a t i on of t he C l a s s V I i nj e c t i on w e l l

c l a s s i f i c a t i on w i t hi n t he U nde r gr ound I nj e c t i on C ont r ol ( U I C ) p r ogr a m o f t he S a f e

D r i nki ng W a t e r A c t ( S D W A )

. G i ve n t ha t t he E P A ’ s pr i m a r y pur pos e f o r t he s e

r e gul a t i ons i s t he p r ot e c t i on of t he i nt e gr i t y of our gr oundw a t e r r e s our c e s
, t he S i e r r a C l ub

w i l l be gi n by c om m e nt i ng on t he t e c hni c a l t op i c s de l i ne a t e d by t he E P A a s be i ng

e s s e nt i a l t o i t s pe r m i t t i ng p r oc e s s e s f or t hi s s pe c i f i c goa l

. W e w i l l of f

e r s ugge s t i ons f or

c l a r i f i c a t i on of t he p r opos e d t e c hni c a l de f i ni t i ons u s e d i n 40 C F R P a r t 146.

A s num e r ous E P A a nd D e pa r t m e nt o f E ne r gy publ i c a t i ons ha ve r e i t e r a t e d, t he

r e gul a t i on of t he ge ol ogi c s t or a ge of C O 2 f or t he p ur pos e of s a f e gua r di ng unde r gr ound

s our c e s of dr i nki ng w a t e r ( U S D W s ) a nd publ i c he a l t h, c a nnot be i s ol a t e d f r om t he

c ons t r uc t i on of a br oa d na t i ona l f r a m e w or k f o r t he r e gul a t i on o f c a rbon c a pt ur e a nd

s e que s t r a t i on ( C C S ) i n i t s m y r i a d c ur r e nt a nd a nt i c i pa t e d f or m s

. W hi l e t e c hni c a l

s t a nda r ds a r e of pa r a m ount i m por t a nc e i n a ddr e s s i ng s a f e t y i s s ue s a t t e nda nt t o C O 2

i nj e c t i on a nd s t or a ge

, t he r e a r e t w o ot he r ke y f a c t or s i n s uc c e s s f ul l y i m pl e m e nt i ng a n

i nt e gr a t e d C C S pr ogr a m : r e gul a t or y ove r s i ght a nd publ i c a c c e pt a nc e

.

I n or de r t o opt i m i z e t he i m pl e m e nt a t i on o f C C S i n t he U S

, i t i s ne c e s s a r y t o

c ons t r uc t a r e gul a t or y f r a m e w or k t ha t i s pr ogr e s s i ve i n vi s i on, r e s pons i ve t o ne w da t a
,

r e pr e s e nt a t i ve of a l l s t a ke hol de r s
, s ubs t a nt i ve i n e x pe r t i s e

, a nd e t hi c a l i n de c i s i on

m a ki ng. T he s e c ond s e c t i on w i l l of f

e r po l i c y r e c o m m e nda t i on s f or e f f

e c t i ve r e gul a t o r y

ove r s i ght

. I n o r de r t o opt i m i z e publ i c a c c e pt a nc e

, i t i s ne c e s s a r y t o a nt i c i pa t e a nd

c ons i de r t he t ype s of c om m un i t y c onc e r ns t ha t a r e be i ng r a i s e d i n c onj unc t i on w i t h

pr opos e d s i t i ngs a nd ope r a t i ons of ge ol ogi c s e que s t r a t i on pr oj e c t s ( a nd f ut u r e c a r bon

c a pt ur e a nd t r a ns por t a t i on pr oj e c t s ) unde r E P A a n d D O E a us pi c e s

. T he t hi r d s e c t i on w i l l

s ugge s t pr ot oc ol s f or e s t a bl i s hi ng m e c ha ni s m s t ha t w i l l a ddr e s s a nd a l l e vi a t e t he s oc i a l

a nd e nvi r onm e nt a l c onc e r ns of l oc a l c om m uni t i e s r e l a t i ng t o he a l t h

, s a f e t y, a nd e c onom i c

f

a c t or s

.4 T e c h n i c al D e f i n i t i on s

A

. A r e a o f R e vi e w a nd F l ui d M ove m e nt

R e c om m e ndat i on A : A dopt t he s pe c i f

i c l anguage us e d by t he ad

- hoc C O 2 w or k

gr oup i n

i t

s R e c om m e ndat i on 3. 1 f or de t e r m i ni ng t he par am e t e r s of e ac h A r e a of R e v i e w

, i

. e

. - -

“ bas e d on ge ne r al l y ac c e pt e d and s i t e r e l e v ant t e c hni que s

, s uc h as m ode l i ng, t ha t de f

i ne

,

i n t hr e e di m e ns i ons

, t he m ax i m um e x t e nt of t he m o de l e d C O 2 pl um e [ i nc l us i v e of f

r e e

phas e and w at e r

- dis s ol v e d C O 2 ] and as s oc i at e d pr e s s u r e f r ont

. ”

I n c ont r a di s t i nc t i on t o t he w o r kgr oup’ s R e c om m e n da t i on 3. 1

, ne i t he r t he

pr opos e d de f i ni t i on o f t he A r e a of R e v i e w ( A O R

) c ont a i ne d i n 40 C F R § 146

. 81( d) nor

t he R e qui r e d C l as s V I P e r m i t I nf

or m at i on f or i ni t i a l l y pe r m i t t i ng t he A O R unde r 40 C F R

§ 146. 82

, s t i pul a t e t ha t t he A O R be de t e r m i ne d us i ng

- - a m ong ot he r t e c hni que s

- -

m ode l i ng a l ong t h r e e di m e ns i ons

. T he t h r e e di m e ns i ona l m ode l i ng r e qui r e m e nt onl y

a

ppe a r s i n t he pr opos e d de f i ni t i on f or t he phr a s e G e ol ogi c Se que s t r at i on P r oj e c t a t 40

C F R § 1 46. 81( d )

. L i ke w i s e

, R e c om m e nda t i on 3. 1 ’ s i nc l us i on of “ t he a s s oc i a t e d pr e s s ur e

f r ont ” a s a r e qui r e d m ode l i ng t a r ge t

– a l ong w i t h t he C O 2 pl um e

- - ne i t he r a ppe a r s i n t he

A r e a of R e v i e w de f i ni t i on no r i t s pe r m i t t i ng l a ngua ge unde r 40 C F R § 146

. 82 [ R e qui r e d

C

l as s I V P e r m i t I n f

or m at i on ]

, but doe s a ppe a r i n t he de f i ni t i on o f t he G e ol ogi c

Se que s t r at i on P r oj e c t a t § 146. 81 ( d)

. C onve r s e l y, t he G e ol ogi c Se que s t r at i on P r oj e c t i s

not na m e d a s t he t a r ge t e d a r e a f o r t he i ni t i a l pe r m i t t i ng i nf o r m a t i on r e qui r e d f or C l a s s V I

i nj e c t i on w e l l s a t § 146

. 82, a nd i s on l y m e nt i one d l a t e r i n t he pr ot oc ol s a t § 146

. 84( a )

[ A r e a of R e v i e w and C or r e c t i v e A c t i on ]

. T he s e di s c r e pa nc i e s a nd om i s s i ons m a y l e a d t o

c onf us i on r e ga r di ng t he na t ur e a nd e xt e nt of t he m ode l i ng r e qui r e d a t t he out s e t f or

de t e r m i ni ng e a c h A O R a nd i t s c ont i nu i ng vi a bi l i t y
, a nd c oul d be c or r e c t e d by i ns e r t i ng

t he w or kgr oup’ s r e c om m e nde d A O R l a ngua ge i n t he D e f

i ni t i ons a nd t he R e qui r e d C l as s

I V P e r m i t I nf

or m at i on s e c t i ons

.5 B

. M e c ha ni c a l I nt e gr i t y

R e c om m e ndat i on B : I nc l ude t he t e r m M e c ha ni c a l I nt e gr i t y unde r t he phr as e s or i gi nal l y

de

f

i ne d at 40 C F

R 146. 81( d

)

.

A l t hough M e c hani c al I nt e gr i t y i s de f i ne d l a t e r i n t he C l a s s V I r e gul a t i ons unde r

i t s ow n he a di ng [ a t 146. 89 ( a ) ]

, i t w oul d be he l pf ul t o i nc l ude i t a s a t e r m w i t hi n t he

D e f

i ni t i ons s e c t i on a t t he be gi nni ng of t he pe r m i t t i ng r ul e s

.

C

. U S D W s a nd E xe m pt e d A qui f e r s

R e c om m e ndat i on C : R e

- e v al uat e t he U I

C pr ogr am ’ s c ur r e nt de f

i ni t i on of an

U nde r gr ound S our c e of D r i nki ng W a t e r ( at 40 § C F

R 146

. 3)

, as appl i e d t o C r i t e r i a f or

E xe m pt e d A qui f e r s ( at 40 C F

R § 146

. 4)

, i n r e gar ds t o t he E P

A ’ s t ot al dis s ol v e d s ol i ds

(

T

D S) s t andar d of < 10

, 000 m g/ L

.

T he U S A r m y, U S N a vy
, U S C oa s t G ua r d, F E M A

, a nd N A S A a l l r out i ne l y us e

r e ve r s e os m os i s t e c hnol ogy t o de s a l i na t e s e a w a t e r ( r a t e d a t 25

, 000

- 35

, 000 m g/ L T D S )

f

or d r i nki ng w a t e r pur pos e s
, a s do boa t ow ne r s a nd c r ui s e s hi p c om pa ni e s

. T he T a m pa

B a y r e gi on i s pr ovi d i ng up t o 25 m i l l i on ga l l ons of dr i nki ng w a t e r pe r da y t h r ough i t s

s e a w a t e r de s a l i na t i on pl a nt

, w hi l e t he c i t y of S a n D i e g o r e c e nt l y a ppr ove d t he

c ons t r uc t i on of a pl a nt t ha t i s s l a t e d t o s uppl y 50 m i l l i on ga l l ons of dr i nki ng w a t e r pe r

da y. M a ny s e a boa r d m uni c i pa l i t i e s a nd ut i l i t y c om pa ni e s c ur r e nt l y de s a l i na t e oc e a n

w a t e r f or i ndus t r i a l a nd a gr i c ul t ur a l us e s ; ot he r s a r e a c t i ve l y c ons i de r i ng t he i ns t a l l a t i on

of de s a l i na t i on pl a nt s f o r r e s i de nt i a l us a ge

.

A s popul a t i on de m a nds a r e i nc r e a s i ng a nd m a ny r e gi ons a r e e xpe r i e nc i ng

l e s s e ni ng r a i n a nd s now f a l l s
, t he f a vor e d gr oundw a t e r dr i nki ng s our c e s w i t h l ow e r T D S

c ount s a r e be c om i ng m or e s c a r c e

. I n t he ne a r f ut u r e

, i t m a y be ne c e s s a r y f or l a ndl oc ke d,

a r i d s t a t e s t o us e w a t e r f r om a qui f e r s t ha t e xc e e ds t he E P A ’ s s t a nda r d f or a pr ot e c t e d

U S D W

, c ur r e nt l y s e t a t < 10

, 000 m g/L T D S

. S i nc e s a l i ne a qui f e r s ha ve be e n i de nt i f i e d

by t he D O E a s ha vi ng t he g r e a t e s t pot e nt i a l s t or a g e c a pa c i t y of a l l vi a bl e t ype s of6 ge ol ogi c s e que s t r a t i on s i t e s i n t he U S

, i t i s of ut m o s t i m por t a nc e a t t he out s e t t ha t a l l

a qui f e r G S c a ndi da t e s be t e s t e d f or i de nt i f i c a t i on a s br a c ki s h, s a l i ne

, or br i ny a l ong a

T D S c ont i nuum

. T a ki ng i nt o a c c ount t he c ur r e nt t e c hnol ogy a nd pr a c t i c e s
, i t w oul d be

a

ppr opr i a t e f o r t he E P A t o r e

- de f i ne p r ot e c t e d a nd e xe m pt e d U S D W s w i t hi n t he C l a s s V I

pe r m i t t i ng p r ot oc ol s a s t hos e a qui f e r s w i t h s uf f i c i e nt qua nt i t i e s of r e pl e ni s ha bl e w a t e r t o

s uppl y a publ i c w a t e r s ys t e m
, r a t e d a t < 35, 000 m g/ L T D S

.

R e gu l at or y O ve r s i gh t

D

. R e gi ona l A dvi s or y B oa r ds

R e c om m e ndat i on D : E s t abl is h a C ar bon C apt ur e and Se que s t r at i on A dv is or y B oar d f or

e ac h of t he E P

A ’ s t e n r e gi onal o f f

i c e s ( ac c or di ng t o gui de l i ne s unde r 40 C F

R § 25

. 7)

, i n

or de r t o opt i m al l y adm i ni s t e r a “ T ai l or e d R e qui r e m e nt s A ppr oac h” t hat appl i e s nat i ona l

s t andar ds w hi c h ar e adapt i v e t o a v ar i e t y of r e gi onal di f f

e r e nc e s i n ge ol ogi c al

f

or m at i ons

, nat ur al r e s our c e s

, w e at he r pat t e r ns

, i ndus t r i al ope r at i ons

, and appl i c abl e

s t at e l aw s

.

C ur r e nt l y, 33 s t a t e s ha ve pr i m a c y i n a dm i ni s t e r i ng a l l c l a s s e s of i nj e c t i on w e l l

pe r m i t t i ng unde r t he U I C pr ogr a m
, w hi l e 7 s t a t e s s ha r e r e s pons i bi l i t y w i t h t he E P A

, a nd

10 s t a t e pr ogr a m s a r e s ol e l y a dm i ni s t e r e d by t he E P A

. T he t a i l or e d na t ur e of t he pr e s e nt

U I C pr ogr a m i s be i ng uphe l d i n t he E P A ’ s pr opos e d r e gul a t or y a pp r oa c h of “ T a i l or e d

R e qui r e m e nt s ” f or C l a s s V I pe r m i t t i ng

. T h r ougho ut t he 2007

- 08 c ons e ns us pr oc e s s f or

f

or m ul a t i ng t he pr opos e d f e de r a l ge os e qu e s t r a t i on s t a nda r ds

, s t a t e r e gul a t or y a ge nc i e s

ha ve c ons i s t e nt l y a s ke d t ha t na t i ona l r e gul a t i ons b e i nc l us i ve of da t a f r om l oc a l a nd

r e gi ona l c ont e xt s

. S t a t e

- by

- s t a t e va r i a t i ons i n s t r uc t ur a l f e a t ur e s s uc h a s t he de ns i t y a nd

por os i t y of r oc k f o r m a t i ons a nd c a p r oc k, t he c om pos i t i on of ge ol ogi c s ys t e m s
, t he

pr e s e nc e of unde r gr ound voi ds a nd c ondui t s
, t he c om m ona l i t y of t r a ns m i s s i ve f a

ul t s
, o r

t he e xi s t e nc e of a c t i ve f r a c t ur e z one s c a n di c t a t e di f f

e r e nt s i t i ng r e qui r e m e nt s

. A l s o, t he

e nvi r onm e nt s s ur r oundi ng t he i nj e c t i on w e l l s c a n e vi de nc e c onf oundi ng a s pe c t s s uc h a s

he a vi l y popul a t e d a nd/ or s oc i a l l y i m pa c t e d c om m u ni t i e s
, de s t a bi l i z i ng w e a t he r e ve nt s
,7 r e c or de d s e i s m i c a c t i vi t y, t he e xi s t e nc e of m i ne r a l de pos i t s
, pr opr i e t a r y oi l a nd ga s

r e s e r ve s
, w a t e r w e l l s
, ot he r c l a s s e s of i nj e c t i on w e l l s
, a ba ndone d w e l l s
, or s e ns i t i ve

w i l dl i f e ha bi t a t s

. S t a t e l a w s gove r ni ng w a t e r a nd m i ne r a l r i ght s va r y w i de l y
, a nd s om e

t a r ge t e d unde r gr ound a qui f e r s m a y s pa n c ont i guou s s t a t e bounda r y l i ne s

.

W hi l e t he m or e di f f i c ul t l e ga l e nt a ngl e m e nt s w i l l r e qui r e f e de r a l l e gi s l a t i on

a nd/ or f e de r a l a dj udi c a t i on, a n opt i m a l s t r uc t u r e f o r a dm i ni s t e r i ng r e gi ona l l y

- t a i l o r e d

r e gul a t i ons w oul d i nc l ude a s pe c i a l i z e d a dm i ni s t r a t or a nd s t a f f t o c oor di na t e a nd di r e c t

a l l C C S

- r e l a t e d pr oj e c t s w i t hi n e a c h of t he E P A ’ s 10 r e gi ons
, s uppor t e d by a n

i nde pe nde nt B oa r d of A dvi s or s w i t h m e m be r s w ho r e s i de i n e a c h o f t hos e r e gi ons

. T o

f ul f i l l gui de l i ne s e s t a bl i s he d a t 40 C F R § 25

. 7, t he B oa r d w oul d be c om pr i s e d of

ba l a nc e d r e pr e s e nt a t i ve s f r om gr oups o f m a j o r s t a ke hol de r s
, s uc h a s : m uni c i pa l a nd s t a t e

gove r nm e nt of f i c i a l s
, E O R / E G R c om pa ni e s
, C C S pr oj e c t m a na ge r s
, e l e c t r i c ut i l i t y

c om pa ni e s
, publ i c a nd m uni c i pa l w a t e r p r ovi de r s
, r e ne w a bl e e ne r gy pr ovi de r s
,

e nvi r onm e nt a l gr oups
, c om m uni t y m e m be r s
, r e s e a r c h s c i e nt i s t s
, ge ol ogi s t s
, publ i c pol i c y

c ons ul t a nt s

. T hi s a dm i ni s t r a t i ve s t r uc t ur e w oul d f a c i l i t a t e t he pr ot e c t i on of s t a t e s ’

di ve r ge nt l oc a l ne e ds w hi l e m a i nt a i ni ng a n um b r e l l a of na t i ona l s t a nda r ds f or t he

r e gul a t i on of c om pl e x m e t hodol ogi e s

.

I n or de r f o r publ i c a c c e pt a nc e t o r e m a i n hi gh

– a s m or e f ul l y di s c us s e d i n t he

t hi r d s e c t i on

– i t i s ne c e s s a r y f or t he B oa r d t o c ons i s t e nt l y a nd c a r e f ul l y m a i nt a i n a

ba l a nc e d r e pr e s e nt a t i ona l r os t e r

. A c a s e i n poi n t i s t he c ur r e nt c om pos i t i on o f t he

G r ound W a t e r P r ot e c t i on C ounc i l

, t hr ough w hi c h t he E P A i n t e r a c t s a nd “ s ha r e s

i nf or m a t i on a nd c ol l a bor a t e s w i t h [ s t a t e U I C ] p r i m a c y pr ogr a m s ”

( ht t p: / / w w w

. e pa

. gov/ s a f e w a t e r / ui c / pr i m a c y. ht m l )

. T he G W P C ’ s w e b s i t e s t a t e s t ha t i t i s

c om pr i s e d of a c a de m i c i a ns
, c i t i z e ns
, e nvi r on m e nt a l i s t s
, gove r nm e nt of f i c i a l s
, a nd

i ndus t r y r e pr e s e nt a t i ve s

. H ow e ve r
, i t s c u r r e nt r os t e r of pr i nc i pa l s i s a l m os t e xc l us i ve l y

c om pr i s e d of gove r nm e nt of f i c i a l s
, gove r nm e nt c o ns ul t a nt s
, f os s i l f ue l i ndus t r y

r e pr e s e nt a t i ve s
, a nd f os s i l f ue l i ndus t r y c ons ul t a nt s

. I t i s vi r t ua l l y l a c ki ng i n

r e pr e s e nt a t i ve a c a de m i c i a ns
, c i t i z e ns
, e nvi r onm e nt a l i s t s
, publ i c i nt e r e s t pr o f e s s i ona l s
, or

publ i c pol i c y c ons ul t a nt s

. I t i s i m pe r a t i ve t ha t t he c om pos i t i on of t he R e gi ona l A dvi s or y

B oa r ds be t r ul y r e pr e s e nt a t i ve of l oc a l c i t i z e ns a nd non

- pa r t i s a n t e c hni c a l c ons ul t a nt s s o8 t ha t c om m uni t i e s c a n pa r t i c i pa t e i n C l a s s V I pe r m i t t i ng pr oc e s s e s a nd f a c i l i t a t e

a c c e pt a nc e of ge os e que s t r a t i on pr oj e c t s i n t he i r r e gi ons

.

E

. “ V ul ne r a bi l i t y E va l ua t i on F r a m e w or k”

R e c om m e nda t i on E : E x

pand t h e “ V u l n e r abi l i t y E v a l ua t i on F r am e w o r k ” t o i n c l ud e a m ul t i

s c al e d c l as s i f

i c a t i on s c he m e f or adv e r s e i m pac ts a s s oc i a t e d w i t h t h e c ap t ur e and

t r an s po r t at i on o f C O 2 and t h e op e r at i ona l i n f

r a s t r uc t ur e i n v o l v e d i n C O 2 s t o r age

, s uc h

a s pi p e l i n e s

, r oad s

, bui l d i ngs

, and w e l l c ons t r uc t i o n.

T he S i e r r a C l ub s uppor t s t he E P A ’ s us e of t he V E F a ppr oa c h t o “ s ys t e m a t i c a l l y

i de nt i f y t hos e c ondi t i ons t ha t m a y i nc r e a s e or de c r e a s e s us c e pt i bi l i t y t o a dve r s e i m p a c t s

f r om G S ” ; w e a ppr ove of t he e s t a bl i s hm e nt of c a t e gor i e s
, t hr e s hol ds

, a nd f l ow c ha r t s t o

a i d a dm i ni s t r a t i ve de c i s i on m a ki ng p r oc e s s e s ( S e e :

ht t p: / / w w w

. e pa

. gov/ c l i m a t e c ha nge / e m i s s i ons / dow nl oa ds / V E F

T e c hni c a l _D oc um e nt _072408. pdf )

. I t i s unde r s t ood t ha t t he vu l ne r a bi l i t y a s s e s s m e nt i s

i nt e nde d t o be i t e r a t i ve a nd a da pt i ve t o ne w da t a

. H ow e ve r
, a t t he out s e t

, S i e r r a C l ub

ur ge s t he E P A t o r e f i ne t he bi na r y vu l ne r a bi l i t y c l a s s i f i c a t i on, w hi c h e xhi bi t s a f l a w e d

ga p be t w e e n t he l ow a nd e l e va t e d l e ve l s i n i t s c ur r e nt f or m ul a t i on

. M os t s pe c i f i c a l l y, t he

t a xonom y onl y a l l ow s f o r a f i ndi ng of c or r e c t i ve a c t i on ( “ m oni t or i ng a nd m i t i ga t i on

pr oc e dur e s ” ) t o be a ppl i e d i n c a s e s of a n e l e va t e d vul ne r a bi l i t y i m pa c t

, a nd doe s not

a nt i c i pa t e t he r e j e c t i on o f a pe r m i t on t he ba s i s of a s i t e ’ s hi gh vul ne r a bi l i t y i m pa c t on

hum a n popul a t i ons
, e c os ys t e m s
, a nd ge os phe r e s s ur r oundi ng t he pr opos e d i nj e c t i on w e l l

s i t e s

. A t t he ve r y m i n i m um
, a t h r e e

- t i e r e d c l a s s i f i c a t i on of l ow
, m e di um

, and hi gh

vul ne r a bi l i t y w oul d t r i gge r c e r t a i n c or r e c t i ve a c t i o ns a t a m e di um l e ve l

, a nd w oul d r e s ul t

i n t he de ni a l o f a pe r m i t w he r e t he r e e xi s t s a hi gh vul ne r a bi l i t y l e ve l f or l e gi s l a t i ve l y

pr ot e c t e d hum a n popul a t i ons
, c ons e r va t i on l a nds

, e nda nge r e d w i l dl i f e

, a nd s ur r oundi ng

bodi e s of w a t e r ot he r t ha n pr ot e c t e d U S D W s

.

S e c onda r i l y, t he S i e r r a C l ub ur ge s t he E P A t o e xp a nd t he V E F de s i gn t o i nc l ude

“ ope r a t i ona l a s pe c t s of G S s uc h a s s ur f a c e i nf r a s t r uc t ur e ( e

. g

. bui l di ngs
, pi pe l i ne s
, w e l l

c ons t r uc t i on)

, a nd s pe c i f i c m oni t or i ng t e c hni que s t o e ns ur e t he i nt e gr i t y of t he G S s ys t e m

r e c om m e nde d. ” A s t he a ut hor s of t he doc um e nt c onc l ude : “ [ T ] he s e e l e m e nt s ne e d t o be9 c ons i de r e d be c au s e t he y m ay pl ay an i m por t a nt r o l e i n de f

i ni ng a pr oj e c t ’ s ov e r al l

v ul ne r abi l i t y ” [ i t a l i c s a dde d]

.

F

. F e de r a l P i pe l i ne S t a nda r ds f or T r a ns por t i ng C O 2

R e c om m e ndat i on F : C o

- or di nat e w i t h t he U S C on gr e s s and f e de r al age nc i e s t o adopt

nat i onal s t andar ds f or m at e r i al s r e qui r e m e nt s a nd pe r f

or m anc e s pe c i f

i c at i ons i n

pi

pe l i ne s us e d t o t r ans m i t C O 2.

T he E P A ’ s O f f i c e of W a t e r ha s s t a t e d t ha t t he t r a n s m i s s i on of c a pt ur e d C O 2 t o

i nj e c t i on s t or a ge s i t e s i s s om e w ha t out s i de t he s c ope of t he S D W A ( “ P r opos e d U I C

R e gul a t i ons f or G e ol ogi c S e que s t r a t i on o f C a r bon D i oxi de ” F e br ua r y 2008; S e e :

ht t p: / / w w w

. e pa

. gov/ s a f e w a t e r / ui c / pdf s /

pa ge _ui c _w a s hi ngt ondc _f e bur a y2008_s um m a r y.

pdf )

. H ow e ve r
, t he E P A i s c oor di na t i ng i t s i s s ua nc e of U I C r e gul a t i ons w i t h t he U S

D e pa r t m e nt of T r a ns por t a t i on
, a nd ha s r e c ogni z e d t he i m por t a nc e of m a i nt a i ni ng s a f e t y

s t a nda r ds a nd r i s k m a na ge m e nt pr a c t i c e s t hr ougho ut t he va r i ous s t a ge s of c a r bon c a pt ur e

,

t r a ns por t a t i on, a nd s t o r a ge

. C ur r e nt l y i n t he U S

, a bout 3, 600 m i l e s of C O 2 pi pe l i ne s a r e

i n ope r a t i on, pr i m a r i l y l oc a t e d i n T e xa s a nd N e w M e xi c o. T he y c a r r y C O 2 f r om

unde r gr ound r e s e r voi r s
, na t ur a l ga s pr oc e s s i ng f a c i l i t i e s
, a m m oni a m a nu f a c t ur i ng pl a nt s
,

a nd a N or t h D a kot a c oa l ga s i f i c a t i on p r oj e c t t o o i l f i e l ds f or us e i n E O R / E G R ( S e e :

ht t p: / / w w w

. ni c hol a s

. duke

. e du/ ni c hol a s / i ns i de r / t he gr e e ngr ok/ c o2pi pe l i ne / )

.

A c c or di ng t o a r e c e nt pr e s s r e l e a s e

, a N or w e gi a n r i s k m a na ge m e nt c om pa ny i s

pa r t ne r i ng w i t h E u r ope a n bus i ne s s e s a nd gove r nm e nt s t o e s t a bl i s h E U pi pe l i ne s t a nda r ds

f

or t r a ns m i t t i ng l a r ge a m ount s of c a pt ur e d C O 2 t o ons hor e a nd of f

s hor e s t or a ge s i t e s

.

T he gui de l i ne s w i l l r e l a t e t o i s s ue s of “ s a f e t y, f a s t pr opa ga t i ng duc t i l e f r a c t ur e s
, f a t i gue

c r a c k gr ow t h, pi pe l i ne ope r a t i on c ondi t i ons
, f l ow a s s ur a nc e

, c or r os i on a nd m a t e r i a l

c om pa t i bi l i t y, ” a nd w i l l a ddr e s s a l l pha s e s of c ons t r uc t i on a nd l i f e t i m e pe r f or m a nc e

,

“ i nc l udi ng t he de s i gn, t e s t i ng
, i ns pe c t i on, ope r a t i o n, m a i nt e na nc e a nd de

- c om m i s s i oni ng

pha s e s ” ( S e e :10 ht t p: / / w w w

. dnv. c om / p r e s s _a r e a / pr e s s _r e l e a s e s / 20 08/ de ve l opi ngt he f i r s t c o2pi pe l i ne s t a nda

r d. a s p )

. O ne i m por t a nt ob j e c t i ve of t he s t a nda r ds i s t o s t a nda r di z e t he t r a ns por t of C O 2

s o t ha t i t w i l l be c om e uni f or m l y i ns ur a bl e by p r i va t e i ns ur a nc e c om pa ni e s

.

R e por t e dl y, A m e r i c a n

- ba s e d oi l c om pa ni e s a r e pa r t i c i pa t i ng i n t he E u r ope a n r ul e

m a ki ng pr oc e s s
, a nd s o pr e s um a bl y w i l l ha ve ongo i ng i nf or

m a t i on a bout t he s t a nda r ds

a dopt e d by t he E U

. T hi s i nf or

m a t i on c a n e nha nc e t he de c i s i on m a ki ng pr oc e s s dur i ng

t he c om i ng pe r i od t ha t U S r e gul a t i ons a r e be i ng p r om ul ga t e d f or a l l s t a ge s of c a rbon

c a pt ur e

, t r a ns por t a t i on
, a nd s t or a ge

. S e ve r a l 2008 C ongr e s s i ona l R e s e a r c h R e por t s

i ndi c a t e t ha t t he U S C ongr e s s ha s be gun t o a ddr e s s t he i s s ue s r e l a t e d t o c ons t r uc t i ng a nd

ope r a t i ng a ne t w or k of C O 2 pi pe l i ne s f or C C S ( S e e :

ht t p: / / a s s e t s

. ope nc r s

. c om / r pt s / R L 33971_20080117. pdf a nd

ht t p: / / nc s e onl i ne

. or g/ nl e / c r s r e por t s / 08A pr / R L 3430 7. pdf )

. W he n s uc h a ne t w or k i s

c ons t r uc t e d

, i t i s p r oba bl e t ha t t he F e d e r a l E n e r gy R e gu l a t or y C o m m i s s i on ( F E R C ) a nd

t h e S ur f a c e T r a ns por t a t i on B o a r d ( S T B ) w i l l r e c e i v e j ur i s d i c t i on o v e r i n t e r s t a t e p i p e l i n e s

u s e d f o r t h i s pur po s e

. C ur r e n t l y

, t h e P i p e l i n e a nd H a z a r dous M a t e r i a l s S a f e t y

A d m i n i s t r a t i on a pp l i e s s a f e t y r e qu i r e m e n t s t o C O 2 p i p e l i n e s t h a t a r e m a nd a t e d by C O 2 ’ s

c l a s s i f i c a t i on a s a C l a s s 2. 2 ( non

- f l a

m

m a b l e g a s ) ha z a r dous m a t e r i a l und e r D O T

r e gu l a t i ons ( 40 C F R § 172. 101)

. S i n c e i t i s l i ke l y t ha t a f e d e r a l l y

- a d m i n i s t r a t e d h i e r a r c hy

w i l l b e e s t a b l i s h e d o v e r t h e n e x t d e c a d e

, i t i s i m po r t a

n t t h a t t h e E P A ’ s t e r r e s t r i a l s t or a g e

r e gu l a t i ons r e m a i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h p r ogr e s s i v e d e v e l op m e n t s f or t h e t r a ns por t a t i on o f C O 2

t o t h e i n j e c t i on w e l l s i t e s

.

P u b l i c A c c e p t an c e

G

. P ubl i c P a r t i c i pa t i on

R e c om m e nda t i on G : A dop t t h e e x i s t i ng r e qu i r e m e n t s f or publ i c par t i c i pa t i on i n pr og r a m s

unde r t h e Sa f

e D r i n k i ng W at e r A c t a t 40 C F

R P ar t 25 and 40 C F

R P ar t 124

.

H i s t or i c a l i l l us t r a t i ons of c o m m un i t y r e s i s t a n c e t o a r a ng e of pr opos e d C C S

pr o j e c t s w ou l d s ug ge s t t h a t E P A po l i c i e s w h i c h t r un c a t e t h e t e c hn i c a l a s pe c t s of C O 2

s t or a g e f r o m t h e s oc i a l a nd c u l t ur a l v a l u e s he l d by t a

r g e t e d l o c a l i t

i e s c a r r y a h i gh d e gr e e of

l i ke l i hood f or pub l i c oppos i t i on

. A 2008 C ongr e s s i ona l R e s e a r c h R e po r t

, “ C om m un i t y11 A

c c e p t a n c e of C a r bon C a p t ur e a nd S e qu e s t r a t i on I n f r a s t r u c t ur e : S i t i ng C h a l l e ng e s ” c i t e s

pub l i c oppos i t i on a s a n i m po r t a n t c ons i de r a t i on i n t he s uc c e s s f ul f o r

m u l a t i on o f n a t i on a l

C C S pol i c y i n g e n e r a l

, a nd l o c a l r e s i s t a n c e a s a ke y i ngr e d i e n t i n t h e a ppr op r i a t e s i t i ng of

ge os e qu e s t r a t i on p r o j e c t s i n p a r t i c u l a r

. T h e R e po r t w a r ns :

C om m un i t y oppos i t i on c ou l d c o m p l i c a t e a nd d e l a y e a c h e l e m e n t of C C S

i m p l e m e n t a t i on

, po t e n t i a l l y a dd i ng y e a r s t o a n a t i on a l C C S de p l oy m e n t

.

A

l t e r n a t i

v e l y

, c o m m un i t y c on c e r ns c ou l d l e a d t o a n a t i on a l p a t c h w or k of

C C S pr o j e c t s c ons t r u c t e d on l y i n pub l i c l y a c c e p t a b l e g e ogr a ph i e s ( or on

pub l i c l a nds )

, c r e a t i ng i n t e r

- r e g i on a l d i s pa r i t i e s a nd f a

i l i ng t o m e e t

c ong r e s s i ona l ob j e c t i v e s

( h t t p : / / a s s e t s

. ope n c r s

. c o m / r p t s / R L 34601_20080729

. pdf a t C R S

- 28)

.

A s a g e n e r a l r u l e

, c o m m un i t y c on c e r ns r e g a r d i ng C C S w i l l f a

l l i n t o t hr e e c a t e gor i e s : h e a l t h

and s af e t

y

, e c onom i c

, and e n v i r onm e nt a l

. I n 2007

, t w o s t ud i e s i n v o l v i n g r e s i d e n t s of

C a l i f o r n i a ’ s C e nt r a

l V a l l e y e xpr e s s e d t h e f o l l o w i ng c on c e r ns a bou t pr opos e d

ge os que s t r a t i on p r o j e c t s i n t h e i r a r e a s : a r i s k of c a r b on d i ox i d e r e l e a s e a nd / or a n i n c r e a s e i n

s e i s m i c a c t i v i

t y [ h e a l t h and s af e t

y ] ; t h e l o w e r i ng of pr op e r t y v a l u e s a nd / o r t h e r a i s i ng o f

c os t

- o f

- l i

v i n g [ e c onom i c ] ; t h e d i s r up t i v e c ons t r u c t i o n of a p i p e l i n e i nf r a s t r u c t u r e f or

t r a ns por t i ng t h e C O 2 t o t h e pr opos e d s i t e a nd / or a n e g a t i

v e c h a ng e t o t h e c h a r a c t e r of t h e

c o m m un i t y [ e n v i r onm e nt a l ] ( s e e “ C om m un i t y ” a t C R S

- 16)

.

W hi l e i t i s unr e a l i s t i c t o e xp e c t t h a t e v e r y c on t e n t i ou s r a t i on a l e r a i s e d by l o c a l

r e s i de n t s c a n b e o v e r c o m e t hr ough t r us t

- bu i l d i ng s t r a t e g i e s i ns t i t u t e d by go v e rn m e n t s a nd

bu s i n e s s e s

, i t i s w e l l

- r e c ogn i z e d t h a t a s ub s t a n t i a l n u m b e r of l e g i t i m a t e g r i e v a n c e s c a n b e

a

l l a y e d ‘ up

- f r on t ’ w i t h t h e s t r u c t u r i ng of p a r t i c i p a t o r y p e rm i t t i ng p r o c e s s e s

. I n c a s e s w h e r e

r e s i de n t s c a n b e c on v i n c e d t h a t b e n e f i t s t o t h e i r c o m m un i t y w i l l ou t w e i gh a n t i c i p a t e d c os t s

,

t h a t t h e r i s k s a r e c l e a r l y a r t i c u l a t e d a nd w i l l b e c o m p e t e n t l y m a n a g e d

, s uf f i c i e n t c o m m un i t y

a c c e p t a n c e c a n b e g a r n e r e d i n o r d e r t o pr o c e e d. E s t a b l i s hi ng p r o c e dur a l m e c h a n i s m s f or

pub l i c c i t i z e ns t o e xpr e s s ge nu i n e c on c e r ns r e l a t i ng t o pr opos e d g e os e qu e s t r a t i on s i t e s

unde r t h e n e w E P A r e gu l a t i ons c a n pr o v i d e oppor t u n i t i e s f o r s ol v i ng d i s pu t e s be f or e t h e y

be c o m e i n t r a c t a b l e

.

H

. E n v i r on m e n t a l J u s t i c e a nd t h e S i t i ng of I n j e ct i o n W e l l s

R e c om m e nda t i on H : A c k now l e dg e t h e c l e ar po t e n t i a l f or e n v i r on m e nt a l j us t i c e i s s ue s t o b e

i n v o l v e d i n t h e s i t i ng o f C l as s V I i n j e c t i on w e l l s

, an d f or m ul a t e m andat or y pr ot o c o l s f or

add r e s s i ng t hos e i s s ue s w i t h i n t h e p e r m i t t i ng pr oc e s s

.12 C a l i f o r n i a ’ s C e nt r a

l V a l l e y i s a p a r t i c u l a r l y v a l u a b l e e x a m p l e f or i l l us t r a t i ng t h e

i m por t a

n c e of bo t h t e c hn i c a l a nd s oc i a l c ons i d e r a t i o n s i n e s t a b l i s hi ng t h e p e r m i t t i ng

pr o t o c o l s f or C l a s s V I i n j e c t i on w e l l s

. T h e C e n t r a

l V a l l e y h a s be e n c ons i s t e n t l y i d e n t i f i e d

a s a pr i m a r y l o c a t i on f or C C S pr o j e c t s by t h e D O E

, t h e L a w r e n c e L i v e r m o r e N a t i on a l

L a bor a t or y

, t h e L a w r e n c e B e r ke l e y N a t i on a l L a bor a t or y

, a nd B r i t i s h P e t r o l e u m

– a m ong

o t h e r s

. T h e D O E h a s e n t e r e d i n t o a n a gr e e m e n t w i t h C l e a n E n e r gy S y s t e m s f or a p i l o t

C C S pr o j e c t a t a n a t u r a l g a s po w e r p l a n t i n K e r n c o un t y

, a nd B P h a s a pp l i e d t o t h e

C a l i f o r n i a E n e r gy C o m m i s s i on f o r a pp r o v a l of a pr opo s e d pr o j e c t

. T hus

, e m p l oy i ng c e r t a

i n

t e c hn i c a l c ons i d e r a t i ons a l on e

, t h e C e n t r a

l V a l l e y i s i d e a l f o r e a r l y C C S de p l oy m e n t

.

H ow e v e r

, a h i s t or y o f e c ono m i c a nd s oc i a l i s s ue s i n t h e r e g i on h a s s e r v e d t o h e i gh t e n

pub l i c r e s i s t a n c e t o s uc h pr o j e c t s

.

D ue t o p r e v i ous i d e n t i f i c a t i on a s a r e g i on w i t h e c on o m i c a l l y d i s a d v a n t a g e d

popu l a t i ons

, d a ng e r ous l y poor a i r qu a l i

t y

, a nd d e gr a de d w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t s

, t h e C e n t r a l V a l l e y

ha s be c o m e t h e f o c us of nu m e r ous go v e r n m e n t a l a n d nonpr of i t i n t e r v e n t i ons

, i n c l ud i ng

ongo i ng E P A s a n c t i ons f or v i o l a t i ons of t h e C l e a n A i r A c t

. T yp i c a l l y

, w h e n n ew i ndus t r i a l

de v e l op m e n t s s e e k t o b e c o m e e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e r e g i on

, t h e y w i l l b e oppos e d un l e s s t h e y

c a n b e s how n t o c a r r y g r e a t e r b e n e f i t s t h a n c os t s t o l o c a l c o m m un i t i e s

. B e c a us e a l l t hr e e

c a

t e gor i e s ( h e a l t

h a nd s a f e t

y

, e c ono m i c

, a nd e n v i r on m e n t a l ) a r e i n t e r d e p e nd e n t i n t h e

C e n t r a

l V a l l e y

, t h e a b i l i t y t o a m e l i or a t e o r s ol v e a ny s pe c i f i c gr i e v a n c e b e c o m e s m or e

d i f f i c u l t

.

I n i t s c o m m e n t s t o t h e p r opos e d r e gu l a t i ons

, t h e E P A s t a t e s : “ E xi s t i ng e l e c t r i c

po w e r g e n e r a t i on p l a n t s t h a t bur n f os s i l f u e l s m a y b e m o r e p r e v a l e n t i n a r e a s w i t h h i gh

pe r c e n t a g e s of pe op l e w ho a r e m i nor i t i e s or h a v e l o w e r i n c o m e s on a v e r a g e

, bu t i t i s ha r d t o

pr e d i c t w h e r e n ew p l a n t s w i t h C C S w i l l b e bu i l t

. ” T h i s s t a t e m e n t f a

i l s t o a c kno w l e dg e t h e

l a

r g e pr e v a l e n c e of pr opos e d g e o l og i c s t or a g e s i t e s ne a r e x i s t i ng o i l a nd g a s f i e l ds a nd / o r

c u r r e n t l y op e r a t i on a l po w e r p l a n t s

. E v e r y s t udy by i ndus t r y a nd bus i n e s s c ons ul t a n t s ha s

c on c l ud e d t h a t C O 2 s t or a g e i s m os t e c ono m i c a l l y f e a s i b l e w h e n s i t e d a s c l os e t o t h e s our c e

of e m i s s i ons a s po s s i bl e

. W he t h e r C O 2 i s de f i n e d a s a n i ndus t r i a l c o m m od i t y o r a

ha z a r dous w a s t e pr odu c t

, i t i s i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h s t or a g e i n h i gh i n c o m e r e s i d e n t i a l

popu l a t i on c e n t e r s

. I t i s m os t l i ke l y t h a t G S s i t e s w i l l b e p r opos e d i n a r e a s of s i m i l a r

popu l a t i ons t o t hos e c o m m un i t i e s

, l i ke C a l i f or n i a ’ s C e n t r a

l V a l l e y

, t h a t h a v e h i s t or i e s of

e c ono m i c d i s a d v a n t a g e

, o f e n v i r on m e n t a l d e gr a d a t i o n f r o m i ndus t r i a l d e v e l op m e n t s

, a nd of

c h r on i c h e a l t

h i s s ue s a m ong t h e g e n e r a l popu l a c e

, e s p e c i a l l y c h i l dr e n

. T h e r e f or e

, i t i s of

u t

m os t i m po r t a n c e f o r t h e E P A t o m a nd a t e p r o t o c o l s f or a ddr e s s i ng e n v i r on m e n t a l j us t i c e

i s s ue s w h i c h w i l l m os t l i ke l y b e a t t e nd a n t t o a l a r g e pe r c e n t a g e o f G S pe r m i t a pp l i c a t i ons

.13 I

. C C S a nd a ‘ C l e a n E n e r gy F ut u r e ’

R e c om m e nda t i on I : E n c our age pub l i c a c c e p t

an c e o f C C S b y e m pha s i z i ng i t as one par t o f

a s t r at e g i c p l an f or e f f

e c t i ng a ‘ C l e an E n e r gy F u t ur e ’

.

A p r o m i n e n t t h e m e i n pub l i c oppos i t i on t o C C S i s t he c on c e r n t h a t g e o l og i c s t o r a g e

w i l l pr o l ong our d e p e nd e n c e o n f os s i l f u e l s a nd d i v

e r

t t h e n e c e s s a r y f unds f or d e v e l op i ng

s u s t a i n a b l e e n e r gy r e s our c e s i n t h e U S

. I n a dd i t i on t o pr o v i d i ng pr o t o c o l s f or pub l i c

ou t r e a c h

, e du c a t i on

, a nd d i a l ogu e a bou t g e os e qu e s t r a t i on s i t i ng

, t h e E P A h a s a n oppor t un i t y

dur i ng t h e s e e a r l y s t a g e s of i m p l e m e n t a t i on of n a t i o na l C C S pol i c i e s t o f r a

m e s oc i a l

pe r c e p t i ons of g e o l og i c s t or a g e a s pa r t o f a l a r g e r s e t of s t r a t e g i e s f or a c h i e v i n g a ‘ C l e a n

E n e r gy F ut u r e

. ’ T h e S i e r r a C l ub s t r ong l y r e c o m m e nd s t h a t t

h e E P A p a r t n e r w i t h t h e D O E

a nd o t h e r f e d e r a l a g e n c i e s t o g a r n e r pub l i c s uppor t f or C C S by c h a r a c t e r i z i ng i t a s one of

s e

v e r a l po l i c y m e a s ur e s de s i gn e d t o r e du c e t h e o v e r a bund a n c e o f C O 2 i n our a t m os phe r e

.

W hi l e C O 2 c a p t u r e i s ou t s i d e t h e s c op e o f t h e s e pr opo s e d r e gu l a t i ons f or C O 2 i n j e c t i on

a nd s t or a g e

, i t i s i m por t a

n t t o r e c ogn i z e t h a t m a ny o ppone n t s of C C S i n g e n e r a l a r e f e a

r f

u l

t h a t t h e d e v e l op m e n t of C O 2 c a p t ur e t e c hno l ogy w i l l pr o l ong ou r r e l i a n c e on c o a l f or

e l e ct r i c a l g e n e r a t i on

, t hus de l a y i ng d e p l oy m e n t of r e new a b l e e n e r gy r e s our c e s s uc h a s w i nd

,

s ol a r

, a nd g e o t h e r m a l

. B y pr o m o t i ng t h e a dop t i on of ‘ c om p a n i on c a r bon c on t r o l

s t r a t e g i e s ’ s uc h a s e n e r gy e f f i c i e n c y

, e n e r gy c ons e r v a t i on

, a nd r e n e w a b l e e n e r gy e l e ct r i c a l

ge n e r a t i on

, t h e E P A c a n h e l p pos i t i on C C S a s one c ons t i t u e n t of a b r o a d e r i n t e g r a t e d

ob j e c t i v e

.

J

. C O 2 a s a V a l u a b l e C o m m od i t y

R e c om m e nda t i on J : R e

- f

r a m e pub l i c p e r c e p t i ons o f C O 2 a s a ha z a r dou s w a s t e m at e r i a l

by f und i ng C C S d e m on s t r at i on pr oj e c ts w h i c h b i o l og i c a l l y or c h e m i c a l l y t r an s f

or m C O 2

i n t o v a l uab l e pr oduc ts

.

L o c a l i

t i e s t h a t oppos e t h e p e r m i t t i ng o f g e o l og i c s e que s t r a t i on pr o j e ct s u s ua l l y ho l d

t h e p e r c e p t i on t h a t C O 2 i s a t ox i c w a s t e m a t e r i a l b e i ng du m p e d a nd bu r i e d i n t h e i r

ba c ky a r ds

. T yp i c a l l y

, l o c a l i

t i e s a r e d i s t r us t f u l of t h e m o t i v a t i ons of bus i n e s s a nd

go v e r n m e n t r e pr e s e n t a t i

v e s w ho s e e k t o a l l a y f e a r s of e c ono m i c

, h e a l t h

, a nd e n v i r on m e n t a l

r i s k s a t t e nd a n t t o pu m p i ng C O 2 i n t o i n j e c t i on w e l l s

. A n i m po r t a n t a v e nu e f or r e

- f r a

m i ng

s uc h p e r c e p t i ons i s by e m ph a s i z i ng C C S m e t hods w h i c h v a l u e c a r bon d i ox i d e a s a n a t u r a l l y

oc c u r r i ng a nd c o m m e r c i a l l y v a l u a b l e r e s our c e

. T h e D O E ’ s c a r bon s e que s t r a t i on pr og r a m14 a

t t

h e N a t i on a l E n e r gy T e c hno l ogy L a bo r a t o r y i n c l u de s f und i ng f or r e s e a r c h a nd

de v e l op m e n t of a d v a n c e d c h e m i c a l a nd b i o l og i c a l a p pr o a c h e s

, i n c l ud i ng s y s t e m s f or

de c a r bon i z a t i on

, pho t os ynt h e s i s

, a nd c on v e r s i on of C O 2 i n t o us e f u l f o r

m s

. H o w e v e r

,

s i nc e no d e m ons t r a t i on p r o j e c t s h a v e b e e n a nnoun c e d o v e r t h e s a m e t i m e p e r i od t h a t

m

u l t i p l e g e os e qu e s t r a t i on pr o j e c t s h a v e b e e n i m p l e m e n t e d

, t h e D O E ’ s “ N o v e l C a r bon

S e que s t r a t i on C on c e p t s ” p r ogr a m a pp e a r s t o b e un de r

- pub l i c i z e d a nd und e r

- f und e d

. T h i s

l a c k o f v i g or i n pr o m o t i ng c a r bon t r a ns f or

m a t i on m e t

hods gi v e s t h e pub l i c t h e i m pr e s s i on

t h a t C C S t e c hno l og i e s a r e b e i ng r e a d i e d s ol e l y f o r t he pur pos e of p e r p e t u a t i ng our

de p e nd e n c y on f os s i l f u e l s f or e l e c t r i c i t y g e n e r a t i on a nd m a nuf a c t ur i ng p r o c e s s e s

.

N um e r ous bus i ne s s ve nt ur e s a r e s e e ki ng oppor t uni t i e s t o pr ove t he e f f i c a c y o f

t he i r c a rbon m i ne r a l i z a t i on p r oc e s s e s w i t h l a r ge r d e m ons t r a t i on pr oj e c t s

. C om pa ni e s

h ol di ng pr opr i e t a r y pa t e nt s f o r us e f ul C O 2

- s e que s t e r e d m a t e r i a l s s uc h a s c a l c i um

c a rbona t e c e m e nt a nd c ons t r uc t i on m a t e r i a l s
, pa pe r pr oduc t s
, bi ode gr a da bl e pl a s t i c s
, a nd

a l ga e bi of ue l s ne e d gove r nm e nt f undi ng a nd s uppor t t o s c a l e

- up t he i r m e t hods

. B y

na r r o w l y t a r ge t i ng ge os e que s t r a t i on a s t he pr i m a r y c a r bon s t or a ge s ol ut i on
, t he f e de r a l

gove r nm e nt i s m i s s i ng a n oppor t uni t y t o s e c ur e br oa de r publ i c a c c e pt a nc e of C C S a s a

s a f e a nd vi a bl e m e t hod f or r e duc i ng t he ove r a bunda nc e of C O 2 i n ou r a t m os phe r e

, a nd i s

n e gl e c t i ng i m por t a nt a ve nue s f o r a c hi e vi ng t ha t go a l

.

C on c l u s i on

A l t hough t he pr opos e d E P A r e gul a t i ons a r e not de s i gne d t o a ddr e s s t he pr e s e nc e

of ove r a bunda nt C O 2 i n our a t m os phe r e

, t he S i e r r a C l ub ur ge s t he E P A t o c ont i nue

f ul f i l l i ng i t s m a nda t e t o pr ot e c t t he e nvi r onm e nt by w or ki ng w i t h t he D O E a nd ot he r

f

e de r a l a ge nc i e s t o c ons t r uc t a c ohe s i ve body o f r e gul a t i ons f or a l l C C S m e t hods

, a nd t o

e xpa nd t he c ur r e nt pur vi e w f r om a t t e nt i on t o t he s ubs ur f a c e m ove m e nt of C O 2 t o i nc l ude

t he a t m os phe r i c di m e ns i ons of t he i s s ue s a s a w hol e

. A ddi t i ona l l y, t he S i e r r a C l ub u r ge s

t he E P A

, D O E

, a nd ot he r f e de r a l a ge nc i e s t o s ubs t a nt i a l l y i nc r e a s e t he i r c om m i t m e nt t o

t he f undi ng o f r e s e a r c h a nd de ve l opm e nt f o r a l t e r n a t i ve s t o ge ol ogi c s t or a ge

, s uc h a s

i nnova t i ve bi ol ogi c a l a nd c he m i c a l a pp r oa c he s t o c a rbon s e que s t r a t i on, t he r e by

i nc r e a s i ng publ i c a c c e pt a nc e of C C S a s a n i m po r t a nt t ool f or c l e a ni ng t he a t m os phe r e

dur i ng t hi s pe r i od of t r a ns i t i on t o a n op t i m a l us e of s us t a i na bl e e ne r gy r e s our c e s

.Letter ID: 0133
Commenter: Anonymous2 Organization: Sierra Club Na tional Global Warming and Ener gy Committee and Sierra Club California-Nevada Regional Conservation Committee on Energy and Climate Change

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21578 Letter Lines: 24 to 31

Comment Code: 1220 1.1.1.1 Terminology and definitions

Comment Code: 3200 2.2 Proposed Area of Review and Corrective Action Requirements (40 CFR 146.84)

Comment: I. Technical Definitions

Area of Review and Fluid Movement: Adopt the specific language used by the adhoc CO2 workgroup in its Recommendation 3.1 for determining the parameters of
each Area of Review, i.e. -- "based on generally accepted and site relevant techniques, such as modeling, that defi ne, in three dimensions, the maximum extent of the modeled CO2 plume [inclusi ve of free phase and water- dissolved CO2]and associated pressure front."

Individual Response: Based on review of all public comments on the AoR definition at 146.84(a), the Agency has modified it to read as follows: The region surrounding the geologic sequestration project where USDWs may be e ndangered by the injecti on activity. The area of review is delineated using computational mode ling that accounts for the physical and chemical properties of all phases of the injected CO2 stream and is based on available site characterization, monitoring, and operational data. The definition in the proposed rule accounted for the varying physical and chemical propertie s of the CO2 including free-phase and waterdissolved CO2, as the commenter suggests. The defin ition in the final rule wi ll continue to do so.

The UIC regulations, including the Class VI regul ations, are designed to ensure protection of USDWs from endangerment. The Agency believes that the AoR needs to incorporate not only the CO2 itself—regardless of satu ration or phase—but also the area of increased pressure ahead of the CO2 plume, which can poten tially displace saline, native fl uids (i.e., naturally occurring salty water) into USDWs. This pressure front would typically encompass an area larger than the plume itself, including any areas of small s cale fingering or heteroge neities or where CO2 saturation is less than 100 percent.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21579 Letter Lines: 33 to 34

Comment Code: 1220 1.1.1.1 Terminology and definitions

Comment: Mechanical Integrity : Include the term Mechanical Integrity under the phrases originally defined at 40 CFR 146.81(d).

1Individual Response: EPA clarifies that mechanical inte grity is defined at §146.89(a) as the absence (1) of significant leak in the casing, tubing, or packer and (2) of significant fluid movement into a USDW through channels adjacent to the injection wellbore.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21580 Letter Lines: 36 to 39

Comment Code: 1220 1.1.1.1 Terminology and definitions

Comment Code: 2120 1.6.1 Deep saline formations

Comment Code: 4400 2.4.4.3 Allowing injection above or between USDWs (seeking comment)

Comment: USDWs and Exempted Aquifers: Re-evaluat e the UIC program's current definition

of Underground Source of Drinking Water (a t 40 CFR 146.3), as applied to Criteria for Exempted Aquifers (at 40 CFR 146.4), in regards to the EPA's total dissolved solids (TDS) standard of

Individual Response: The Agency acknowledges commenter concerns about water resources and future water resource availability. However, modifying the definition of a USDW is outside the scope of the GS rulemaking. USDWs are defined as aquifers currently being used as sources of drinking water or those capab le of supplying a public water sy stem and they have a total dissolved solids (TDS) content of 10,000 milligrams per liter or less (§144.3).

The primary goal of the UIC Program under the SDWA is to protect USDWs in order to ensure a reliable supply of drinking water for the Amer ican public. The GS rule, as part of the UIC program regulations, continues the program’s stat utory mandate of ensuring the protection of USDWs. The permitting, siting, construction, opera tion, monitoring, and post-injection site care requirements in the GS rule built on a long-standi ng protective regulatory fr amework, tailored to the unique characteri stics of CO2 GS.

EPA recognizes that there is increasing demand for water re sources and that technology improvements may make high TDS aquifers viable drinking water sources. EPA believes these potential resources should be c onsidered when injection depth wa ivers are sought. Therefore, the final GS rule at §146.95(b) requires the Director to consider thes e issues in determining whether an injection depth waiver is appropriate. Spec ifically, the Director must consider whether alternative injection si tes are available; community needs, demands, and supply from drinking water resources; planned needs, potential and/or future use of USDWs and non-USDWs in the area; and a plan for securing alternative resour ces or treating USDW formation waters in the event of contamination related to the Class VI injection activity.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21581 Letter Lines: 41 to 48

Comment Code: 1260 1.1.1.5 More certainty/stringency is needed

Comment Code: 1970 1.4.4.6 Need for other consultations

Comment: II. Regulatory Oversight

2Regional Advisory Boards: Establish a Car bon Capture and Sequest ration Advisory Board for each of the EPA's ten regional offices (according to guidelines under 40 CFR 25.7), in order to optimally ad minister a "Tailored Requirements Approach" that applies national standard s which are adaptive to a variety of regional differences in geological form ations, natural resources, weather patterns, industrial operations, and applicable state laws.

Individual Response: EPA clarifies that establishing a Carbon Capture and Sequestration Advisory Board is out of the scope of the GS rulemaking. EPA adds that the Agency plans to collect and review data every six years on GS projects to dete rmine whether the appropriate amount and types of information and appropria te documentation are being collected, and to determine if modifications to the requirements are appropriate or necessary. As part of this adaptive rulemaking approach, EPA will consult with a variety of stakeholders, including the National Drinking Water Advisory Council, associations and organi zations, ORD, and experts to ensure that implementation of the national Cla ss VI program is based on the best available

science.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21582 Letter Lines: 50 to 54

Comment Code: 1820 1.4.1.1 Vulnerability Evaluation Framework (VEF)

Comment: "Vulnerability Evaluation Framework": E xpand the "Vulnerability Evaluation

Framework" to include a multi-scaled clas sification scheme for adverse impacts associated with the capture and tran sportation of CO2 and the operational infrastructure involved in CO2 storage, su ch as pipelines, roads, buildings, and

well construction.

Individual Response: The Agency clarifies that the VEF is intended to be a risk screening tool, but it is not a required component of the GS site selection proce ss. The UIC Class VI well permit application requirements, including the mi nimum criteria for s iting at §146.83, and the information requirements at §146.82 provide the basis for determin ing whether a proposed GS site is geologically appropriate and the proposed operations are technicall y viable, safe, and will not endanger USDWs.

The GS rule provides flexibility to determine the suitability of a proposed site based on extensive, site-specific data. The Director may consider some components of the VEF (e.g., information regarding wells, faults, and pressure changes) when assessing the appropriateness of a site for GS; however, the Director's permit a pproval determination is based on UIC Class VI requirements and not the VEF. EP A clarifies that con cerns about operational infrastructure (e.g., pipelines) have no bearing on USDW protectio n and are outside of the scope of the GS rulemaking.

3Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21583 Letter Lines: 56 to 58

Comment Code: 1300 1.1.2.3 Comments on other aspects of CCS (capture, transport)

Comment: Federal Pipeline Standards for Transpor ting CO2: Co-ordinate with the US Congress and federal agenci es to adopt national st andards for materials requirements and performance specifications in pipelines used to transmit CO2.

Individual Response: EPA clarifies that the purpose of th e Class VI GS rule is to ensure consistency in permitting underground injection of CO2 at GS operations across the United States and provide requirement s to prevent endangerment of USDWs in anticipation of the

eventual use of GS to reduce CO2 emissions. Tran sportation of CO2 via pi pelines is outside the scope of the Class VI GS rulemaking.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21596 Letter Lines: 60 to 64

Comment Code: 5520 2.10.1 Appropriateness of existing p ublic participation requirements (Part 25 and Part 124) for GS (seeking comment)

Comment: III. Public Acceptance

Public Participation: Adopt the existing requirements for public participation in programs under the Safe Drinking Water Act at 40 CFR Part 25 and 40 CFR Part

124.

Individual Response: EPA agrees that the existing UIC pub lic participation requirements as specified in 40 CFR 25 and 40 CFR 124 are appropria te for GS projects. In addition, because of the unique nature of GS projects, and the anticipa ted level of public intere st in GS projects, EPA encourages early public involvement in GS proj ects. Providing the public with accurate, project specific information in the early stages of each GS project can help clar ify project details and avoid public misperceptions about the nature and sa fety of GS projects, a nd will allow a potential GS owner or operator and the permitting agency to address the public's concerns before the permitting process is complete.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21597 Letter Lines: 66 to 69

Comment Code: 8000 4.1 Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice

Comment: Environmental Justice and the Siting of Injection Wells: Acknowledge the clear potential for environmental justice issues to be involved in th e siting of Class VI injection wells, and formulate manda tory protocols for addressing those issues within the permitting process.

Individual Response: EPA recognizes that some Class VI wells may be sited in areas with high percentages of minority, low-inco me, or tribal people. Furthermore, the Agency agrees that

4permit writers reviewing Class VI well permit applications should consider environmental justice issues when conducting their review.

EPA clarifies that siting of GS projects is based on the pres ence of appropriate geologic

formations that can receive and confine the tota l volume of CO2 an ticipated to be injected under § 146.83(a)(2). The GS regulation at § 146.82 requir es owners/operators to collect and submit extensive geological data on the proposed GS si te, including an assessment of the geologic, hydrogeologic, geochemical, and geomechanical prope rties of the proposed GS site to ensure

that GS wells are located in suitable form ations and that USDWs are protected from endangerment.

EPA also emphasizes that the purpose of the GS rule is to protect USDWs through permitting, siting, construction, operation, in jection, and post-injection s ite care and site closure requirements that are tailored to address the unique nature of GS . The Class VI requirements, in turn, minimize health risks to all populations , including minority, and low-income, and tribal populations. The "Risk and Occurrence Document for the Geologic Sequestration Rulemaking," available in the rulemaking docket, presents a broad discussion of risks to human health and the environment associated with GS, including thos e addressed under SDWA authority and those beyond the scope of the SDWA. The GS rule does not address risks outside the scope of the

SDWA.

EPA is developing guidance for UI C Directors that places emphasi s on considering the potential impact of any GS permits on communities (s uch as minority, and lo w-income and tribal populations) when evaluating Class VI injecti on well permit applications. The guidance also provides suggestions and tools for targeted outreach to ensure mo re meaningful public input and participation from the most affected comm unities during the permit evaluation and approval process. Additionally, as part of the permitting pr ocess pursuant to requirements at 40 CFR Part 124 the public has an opportunity to review public notices on GS permit a pplications, participate in hearings related to GS permit decisions, and inform permit writers of any environmental justice concerns associated with a specific GS project.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21598 Letter Lines: 71 to 73

Comment Code: 1280 1.1.2.1 General comments on climate change/ global warming

Comment: CCS and a 'Clean Energy Future': Encourage public acceptance of CCS by emphasizing it as one part of a strategic national plan for effecting a 'Clean
Energy Future'.

Individual Response: EPA agrees that GS is one technology in a portfolio of options, including energy conservation, efficiency improvements, a nd the use of alternative fuels and renewable energy sources, that could be deployed to re duce CO2 emissions. However, the use of and investment in these technologies is outside the scope of the Class VI GS rulemaking. The Class VI GS requirements are designed to ensure that , where GS is deployed, projects are permitted, sited, constructed, operated, and closed in a ma nner that protects USDWs from endangerment.

5Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21599 Letter Lines: 75 to 77

Comment Code: 1680 1.3.8 Don't overstate ris k, don't stigmatize CO2

Comment: CO2 as a Valuable Commodity: Re-frame pub lic perceptions of CO2 as a hazardous waste material by funding CCS demonstr ation projects which biologically or chemically transform CO2 in to valuable products.

Individual Response: EPA recognizes that injecting large volumes of CO2 for GS poses unique challenges that, if not properly managed, could endanger drinking water s ources and have other adverse impacts. However, with proper site sele ction, the final, tailored, Class VI requirements address the large volumes of CO2 injected, its bu oyancy, potential corrosivity in the presence of water, and potential impurities in the CO2 st ream. In addition, the tailored permitting, siting, construction, operation, monitoring, and post-injection site care re quirements in the GS rule are intended to prevent leakage from inj ection formations and protect USDWs.

EPA adds that the requirements of the GS rule are tailored to the nature of the CO2 itself, and do not address the status of CO2 as either a pollutant, commodity, or waste. The comment regarding funding of CCS demonstration projects is outside the scope of this rulemaking.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21600 Letter Lines: 92 to 100

Comment Code: 1300 1.1.2.3 Comments on other aspects of CCS (capture, transport)

Comment: As numerous EPA and Department of En ergy publications have reiterated, the regulation of the geologic storage of CO2 for the purpose of safeguarding underground sources of drinking water (U SDWs) and public health, cannot be

isolated from the construction of a broa d national framework for the regulation of carbon capture and sequestra tion (CCS) in its myriad current and anticipated

forms. While technical standards are of paramount importance in addressing safety issues attendant to CO2 injecti on and storage, there are two other key factors in successfully implementing an integrated CCS program: regulatory oversight and public acceptance.

Individual Response: EPA clarifies that the Class VI GS regulation is being promulgated under authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) . The purpose of the Class VI GS rule is to ensure consistency in permitting underground inje ction of CO2 at GS operations across the United States and provide requirements to prev ent endangerment of USDWs in anticipation of

the eventual use of GS to reduce CO2 emissions.

EPA believes that the Class VI GS regulation, which builds upon the l ong-standing protective framework of the UIC program, will provide the re gulatory certainty and oversight that operators have requested. EPA also believe s that tailored requirements to ensure that GS projects are permitted, sited, constructed, operated, and closed in a manner that avoids releases of CO2 will protect USDWs from endangerment and thus may improve public confidence in GS.

6Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21601 Letter Lines: 102 to 113

Comment Code: 1430 1.2.1.2 Support EPA's authority to regulate CO2 injection

Comment: In order to optimize the implementation of CCS in the US, it is necessary to construct a regulatory framework that is progressive in vision, responsive to new data, representative of all stakeholders, substan tive in expertise, and ethical in decision making. The second sect ion will offer policy recommendations for effective regulatory oversight. In order to optimize public acceptance, it is necessary to anticipate and consider th e types of community concerns that are being raised in conjunction with proposed sitings a nd operations of geologic sequestration projects (and future carbon capture and transportation projects) under EPA and DOE auspices. The third section will suggest protocols for establishing mechanisms that will addr ess and alleviate the social and

environmental concerns of local commun ities relating to health, safety, and

economic factors.

Individual Response: EPA agrees that input of and part icipation by a wide spectrum of stakeholders is a vital compone nt of successful rulemaking. The Agency appreciates the degree of cooperation, participation, and active dialogue between the EPA and stakeholders and will

continue to work with stakeholders a nd experts as it implements the GS rule.

EPA is using an adaptive approach to re gulating GS under the UIC Program. Even after finalization of the GS regulation, the Agency plan s to collect and review data every six years on GS projects to determine whether the appropr iate amount and types of information and appropriate documentation are being collected, and to determine if modifications to the requirements are approp riate or necessary.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21602 Letter Lines: 115 to 124

Comment Code: 3200 2.2 Proposed Area of Review and Corrective Action Requirements (40 CFR 146.84)

Comment: Technical Definitions

A. Area of Review and Fluid Movement

Recommendation A: Adopt the specific langua ge used by the ad-hoc CO2 workgroup in its Recommendation 3.1 for determining the parameters of each Area of Review, i.e. -- "based on generally accepted and s ite relevant techniques, such as modeling, that define, in three dimensions , the maximum extent of the modeled CO2 plume [inclusive of free phase and water- dissolved CO2]and associated pressure front."

Individual Response: Based on review of all public comments on the AoR definition at

7146.84(a), the Agency has modified it to read as follows: The region surrounding the geologic sequestration project where USDWs may be e ndangered by the injecti on activity. The area of review is delineated using computational mode ling that accounts for the physical and chemical properties of all phases of the injected CO2 stream and is based on available site characterization, monitoring, and operational data. The definition in the proposed rule accounted for the varying physical and chemical propertie s of the CO2 including free-phase and waterdissolved CO2, as the commenter suggests. The defin ition in the final rule wi ll continue to do so.

The UIC regulations, including the Class VI regul ations, are designed to ensure protection of USDWs from endangerment. The Agency believes that the AoR needs to incorporate not only the CO2 itself—regardless of satu ration or phase—but also the area of increased pressure ahead of the CO2 plume, which can poten tially displace saline, native fl uids (i.e., naturally occurring salty water) into USDWs. This pressure front would typically encompass an area larger than the plume itself, including any areas of small s cale fingering or heteroge neities or where CO2 saturation is less than 100 percent.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21603 Letter Lines: 126 to 144

Comment Code: 3300 2.2.1 Delineating the AoR/M odeling CO2 movement

Comment: In contradistinction to the workgroup's Recommendation 3.1, neith er the proposed definition of the Area of Review (AOR ) contained in 40 CFR 146.81(d) nor the Required Class VI Permit Information fo r initially permitting the AOR under 40 CFR 146.82, stipulate that the AOR be dete rmined using --among other techniques -- modeling along three dimensions. The th ree dimensional modeling requirement only appears in the propose d definition for the phrase Geologic Sequestration Project at 40 CFR 146.81(d). Likewise, R ecommendation 3.1's inclusion of "the associated pressure front" as a require d modeling target along with the CO2 plume -- neither appears in the Area of Review definition nor its permitting language under 40 CFR 146.82 [Required Cla ss IV Permit Information], but does appear in the definition of the Geol ogic Sequestration Pr oject at 146.81(d). Conversely, the Geologic Sequest ration Project is not name d as the targeted area for the initial permitting information requi red for Class VI injection wells at section 146.82, and is only mentioned late r in the protocols at section 146.84 (a) [Area of Review and Corrective Acti on]. These discrepancies and omissions may lead to confusion regarding the natu re and extent of the modeling required at the outset for determining each AOR and its continuing viability, and could be corrected by inserting the workgro up's recommended AOR language in the Definitions and the Required Class IV Permit Information sections.

Individual Response: EPA disagrees that the term “three dime nsional” that is in the definition of the Geologic Sequestration Project must necessa rily be repeated in the AoR requirement for modeling for that modeling to be implicitly thre e-dimensional. The intent of the AoR, a longstanding concept within the UIC Program, is to delineate the surface area and all subsurface formations below it that may potentially be impacted by injecti on activity. Acceptable

8delineation models will provide predictions of CO 2 fate and transport, as well as changes in formation pressure, in three dime nsions as a function of time that can be used to delineate the subsurface storage site and the AoR. Although EP A disagrees with the commenter's suggestions, the Agency has carefully cons idered all comments on the AoR definition at 146.84(a) and modified it to read as follows: The region surrounding the geologic sequestration project where USDWs may be endangered by the injection activity. The area of review is delineated using computational modeling that accounts for the physi cal and chemical propert ies of all phases of the injected CO2 stream and is based on av ailable site characte rization, monitoring, and operational data.

EPA believes that this definition is sufficiently broad and describes both the intent of the computational modeling and the relationship of th e AoR to areas that are subject to the risks associated with injection.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21604 Letter Lines: 146 to 153

Comment Code: 1220 1.1.1.1 Terminology and definitions

Comment: B. Mechanical Integrity

Recommendation B: Include the term Mech anical Integrity un der the phrases originally defined at 40 CFR 146.81(d).

Although Mechanical Integrity is defined la ter in the Class VI regulations under its own heading [at 146.89(a)], it would be helpful to include it as a term

within the Definitions section at th e beginning of the permitting rules.

Individual Response: EPA clarifies that mechanical inte grity is defined at §146.89(a) as the absence (1) of significant leak in the casing, tubing, or packer and (2) of significant fluid movement into a USDW through channels adjacent to the injection wellbore.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21605 Letter Lines: 155 to 185

Comment Code: 2120 1.6.1 Deep saline formations

Comment: C. USDWs and Exempted Aquifers

Recommendation C: Re-evalu ate the UIC program's current definition of an Underground Source of Drinking Water (a t 40 CFR 146.3), as applied to Criteria for Exempted Aquifers (at 40 CFR 146.4), in regards to the EPA's total dissolved solids (TDS) standard of

The US Army, US Navy, US Coast Guard, FE MA, and NASA all routinely use reverse osmosis technology to desalinate seawater (rated at 25,000-35,000 mg/L TDS) for

9drinking water purposes, as do boat owners a nd cruise ship companies. The Tampa Bay region is providing up to 25 million gallons of drinking water per day through its seawater desalination plant, while the city of San Diego recently approved the construction of a plant that is slated to supply 50 million gallons of drinking water per day. Many seaboard municipalities and utility companies currently desalinate ocean water for indus trial and agri cultural uses; others are actively considering the installation of desalination plants for residential

usage.

As population demands are increasing and many regions are expe riencing lessening rain and snow falls, the favored groundw ater drinking source s with lower TDS counts are becoming more scarce. In the ne ar future, it may be necessary for landlocked, arid states to use water from aquifers that exceeds the EPA's standard for a protected USDW, currently set at aquifers have been identified by the DOE as having the greatest potential storage capacity of all viable types of geologic sequestration sites in the US, it is of utmost importance at the outse t that all aquifer GS candidates be

tested for identification as brackish, saline, or br iny along a TDS continuum. Taking into account the current tech nology and practices, it would be appropriate for the EPA to re-define prot ected and exempted USDWs within the Class VI permitting protocols as those a quifers with sufficient quantities of replenishable water to supply a public water system, rated at

Individual Response: The Agency acknowledges commenter concerns about water resources and future water resource availability. Howeve r, modifying the definition of a USDW and analyzing water resource availa bility is outside the scope of the GS rulemaking. USDWs are defined as aquifers currently being used as s ources of drinking wate r or those capable of supplying a public water system and they have a total dissolved solid s (TDS) content of 10,000 milligrams per liter or less (§144.3).

The primary goal of the UIC Program under the SDWA is to protect USDWs in order to ensure a reliable supply of drinking water for the Amer ican public. The GS rule, as part of the UIC program regulations, continues the program’s stat utory mandate of ensuring the protection of USDWs. The permitting, siting, construction, opera tion, monitoring, and post-injection site care requirements in the GS rule built on a long-standi ng protective regulatory fr amework, tailored to the unique characteri stics of CO2 GS.

EPA clarifies that a state’s Cla ss VI primacy program may be more stringent then the federal requirements. For example, a state has the disc retion to ban GS projects from taking place in specific formations or other areas where there ar e water resource issues. EPA believes that state permitting authorities are in the best position to make determina tions about the appropriateness of a particular site based on all available information, including drinking water supply needs

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21606 Letter Lines: 187 to 196

10Comment Code: 1260 1.1.1.5 More certainty/stringency is needed

Comment Code: 1970 1.4.4.6 Need for other consultations

Comment: Regulatory Oversight

D. Regional Advisory Boards

Recommendation D: Establish a Carbon Capt ure and Sequestration Advisory Board for each of the EPA's ten regional offices (according to guidelines under 40 CFR 25.7), in order to optimally administer a "Tailored Requirements Approach" that applies national standards which are adaptive to a variety of regional differences in geological formations, natural resources, weather patterns, industrial operations, and applicable state laws.

Individual Response: EPA will continue to consult with a variety of stakeholders, including the National Drinking Water Advisory Council, associations and orga nizations, ORD, and experts; review permits; and continue to hold workshops to build expertise and ensure that implementation of the national program is based on the best available science. The Agency plans to collect and review data every six years on GS projects to determine whether the appropriate amount and types of information and appropria te documentation are being collected, and to determine if modifications to the requir ements are appropriate or necessary.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21607 Letter Lines: 198 to 216

Comment Code: 1530 1.2.3.1 State regulatory effort s on GS (seeking comment)

Comment: Currently, 33 states have primacy in admi nistering all classes of injection well permitting under the UIC program, while 7 st ates share responsibility with the EPA, and 10 state programs are solely administered by the EPA. The tailored nature of the present UIC program is being upheld in the EPA's proposed regulatory approach of "Tailored Re quirements" for Class VI permitting. Throughout the 2007-08 consensus process fo r formulating the proposed federal geosequestration standards, state regulato ry agencies have consistently asked that national regulations be inclusive of data from lo cal and regional contexts. State-by-state variations in structural features such as the density and porosity of rock formations and cap roc k, the composition of geologic systems, the presence of underground voids and condu its, the commonality of transmissive
faults, or the existence of active fract ure zones can dictat e different siting requirements. Also, the environments surrounding the inj ection wells can evidence confounding aspects such as heavily populated and/ or socially impacted communities, destabilizing weather even ts, recorded seismic activity, the existence of mineral deposits, proprietary oil and gas reserves, water wells, other classes of injection wells, aban doned wells, or se nsitive wildlife habitats. State laws governing water and mineral rights vary widely, and some targeted underground aquifers may span contiguous state boundary lines.

11Individual Response: EPA clarifies that SDWA, under sec tion 1422(b)(3)(9)(A), requires that the regulations of the Administrator "permit or provide for varying geologic, hydrological, or

historical conditions in different states and in different areas within a state." EPA has provided the Director discretion in appl ying the GS requirements, taking into account varying conditions, particularly with regard to the evaluation of site characteristics. For additional information, please see the discussion of EPA’ s Final Regulatory Approach in the preamble to the final GS

rule.

EPA recognizes the complexity and importance of states' approaches to managing GS and is aware that states are currently in various stages of developing statutor y frameworks, regulations, workgroups, technical guidance, and stra tegies for addressing CCS and GS.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21614 Letter Lines: 218 to 248

Comment Code: 1910 1.4.4 Stakeholder outreach

Comment: While the more difficult legal entangleme nts will require fe deral legislation and/or federal adjudication, an optimal structure for administering regionallytailored regulations would include a specialized admi nistrator and staff to coordinate and direct all CCS-related pr ojects within each of the EPA's 10 regions, supported by an independent Board of Advisors with members who reside in each of those regions. To fulfill gui delines established at 40 CFR 25.7, the Board would be comprised of balanced representatives from groups of major stakeholders, such as: municipal and state government officials, EOR/EGR companies, CCS project managers, elect ric utility companies, public and municipal water providers, renewable energy providers, environmental groups, community members, research scientists, geologists, public policy consultants.

This administrative structure would f acilitate the protection of states' divergent local needs while maintaining an umbrella of natio nal standards for the regulation of complex methodologies.

In order for public acceptance to remain high -- as more fully discussed in the third section -- it is necessary for the Board to consistently and carefully maintain a balanced representational ro ster. A case in point is the current composition of the Ground Water Protecti on Council, through which the EPA

interacts and "shares information and co llaborates with [state UIC] primacy programs"(http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/ primacy.html). The GWPC's web site states that it is comprised of academ icians, citizens, environmentalists, government officials, and industry represen tatives. However, its current roster of principals is almost exclusively comprised of government officials, government consultants, fossil fuel indus try representatives, and fossil fuel industry consultants. It is virtually la cking in representative academicians, citizens, environmentalists, public intere st professionals, or public policy consultants. It is imperative that th e composition of the Regional Advisory Boards be truly representative of lo cal citizens and non-partisan technical consultants so that communities can partic ipate in Class VI permitting processes

12and facilitate acceptance of geoseque stration projects in their regions.

Individual Response: EPA will continue to consult with a variety of stakeholders, including the National Drinking Water Advisory Council, associations and orga nizations, ORD, and experts; review permits; and continue to hold workshops to build expertise and ensure that implementation of the national program is based on the best available science. The Agency plans to collect and review data every six years on GS projects to determine whether the appropriate amount and types of information and appropria te documentation are being collected, and to determine if modifications to the requir ements are appropriate or necessary.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21615 Letter Lines: 250 to 283

Comment Code: 1820 1.4.1.1 Vulnerability Evaluation Framework (VEF)

Comment: E. "Vulnerability Evaluation Framework"

Recommendation E: Expand the "Vulnerability Evaluation Framework" to include a

multi-scaled classification scheme for a dverse impacts associated with the capture and transportation of CO2 and the operational infrastructure involved in CO2 storage, such as pipelines, road s, buildings, and well construction.

The Sierra Club supports the EPA's use of the VEF approach to "systematically identify those conditions that may incr ease or decrease susceptibility to adverse impacts from GS"; we approve of the establishment of categories,
thresholds, and flowcharts to aid admini strative decision maki ng processes(See:http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads/VEFTechnical_Document_072408.pdf). It is und erstood that the vulnerability

assessment is intended to be iterative and adaptive to new data. However, at the outset, Sierra Club urges the EPA to refine the binary vulnerability classification, which exhibits a flawed ga p between the low and elevated levels in its current formulation. Most specif ically, the taxonomy only allows for a finding of corrective action ("monitoring and mitigation procedures") to be applied in cases of an elevated vulnera bility impact, and does not anticipate the rejection of a permit on the basis of a site's high vulnerability impact on human populations, ecosystems, and geosphe res surrounding the proposed injection well sites. At the very minimum, a thr ee-tiered classification of low, medium, and high vulnerability would trigger certa in corrective actions at a medium
level, and would result in the denial of a permit where there exists a high vulnerability level for legislatively pr otected human populatio ns, conservation lands, endangered wildlife, and surrounding bodies of water othe r than protected

USDWs.

Secondarily, the Sierra Club urges the EP A to expand the VEF design to include "operational aspects of GS such as su rface infrastructure (e.g. buildings, pipelines, well construction), and specifi c monitoring techniques to ensure the integrity of the GS system recommende d." As the authors of the document

13conclude: "[T]hese elements need to be considered because they may play an important role in defining a project's overall vulnerabili ty"[italics added].

Individual Response: The Agency clarifies that the VEF is intended to be a risk screening tool, but it is not a required component of the GS site selection proce ss. The UIC Class VI well permit application requirements, including the mi nimum criteria for s iting at §146.83, and the information requirements at §146.82 provide the basis for determin ing whether a proposed GS site is geologically appropriate and the proposed operations are technicall y viable, safe, and will not endanger USDWs.

EPA believes that requiring appr opriate site characterization by the owner or operator and providing an appropriate de gree of flexibility to the Director to evaluate site-specific geologic data will afford the greatest protection of US DWs. The issuance of a UIC Class VI permit is determined based on evaluation of site-specific permit information pursuant to the requirements at §§146.82 and 146.83. The Director may consid er some components of the VEF (e.g., information regarding wells, faults, and pressure changes) when assessing the appropriateness of a site for GS; however, the Director's permit a pproval determination is based on UIC Class VI requirements and not the VEF. EP A clarifies that con cerns about operational infrastructure (e.g., pipelines) have no bearing on USDW protectio n and are outside of the scope of the GS rulemaking.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21616 Letter Lines: 285 to 336

Comment Code: 1300 1.1.2.3 Comments on other aspects of CCS (capture, transport)

Comment: F. Federal Pipeline Standards for Transporting CO2

Recommendation F: Co-ordinate with the US Congress and federal agencies to adopt national standards for materials requireme nts and performance specifications in pipelines used to transmit CO2.

The EPA's Office of Water ha s stated that the transmi ssion of captured CO2 to injection storage sites is somewhat outside the scope of the SDWA ("Proposed UIC Regulations for Geologic Se questration of Carbon Dioxide " February 2008; See: http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/pdfs/p age_uic_washingtondc_feburay2008_summ ary.pdf). However, the EPA is coordinating its issuance of UIC regulations with the US Department of Transportation, and has recognized the importance of maintaining safety standards and risk management practic es throughout the various stages of carbon capture, transpor tation, and storage. Currently in the US, about 3,600 miles of CO2 pipelines are in operation, primarily located in Texas and New Mexico. They carry CO2 fr om underground reservoirs, natural gas processing facilities, ammonia manufactur ing plants, and a North Dakota coal gasification project to oil fiel ds for use in EOR/EGR (See: http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/nicholas/in sider/thegreengrok/co2pipeline/).

14According to a recent press release, a No rwegian risk management company is partnering with European businesses and governments to establish EU pipeline standards for transmitting large amounts of captured CO2 to onshore and offshore storage sites. The guidelines will relate to issues of "safety, fast propagating ductile fractures, fatigue crack growth, pipeline operation conditions, flow assurance, corrosion and material compatibility," and will address all phases of construction and lifetime performance, "including the design, testing, inspection, operation, maintenance and de-commissioning phases"(See: http://www.dnv.com/press_area/press_release s/2008/developingthefi rstco2pipelines tandard.asp) . One important objective of the standards is to standardize the transport of CO2 so that it will become uniformly insurable by private insurance companies.

Reportedly, American-based oil companies ar e participating in the European rulemaking process, and so presumably will have ongoing information about the standards adopted by the EU. This inform ation can enhance the decision making process during the coming period that US regulations are being promulgated for all stages of carbon capture, transportation, and storage. Several 2008 Congressional Research Reports indicat e that the US Congress has begun to

address the issues related to constr ucting and operating a network of CO2 pipelines for CCS(See: http://assets .opencrs.com/rpts/RL33971_20080117.pdf and http://ncseonline.org/nle/crsreports/08A pr/RL34307.pdf). When such a network is constructed, it is probable that the Federa l Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Surface Transportation Board (STB) will receive jurisdiction over interstate pipelines used for this purpose. Currently, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration applies safe ty requirements to CO2 pipelines that are mandated by CO2's classification as a Class 2.2 (nonflammable gas) hazardous material unde r DOT regulations (40 CFR 172.101). Since it is likely that a federally-administrated hierarchy will be established over the next decade, it is important that the EPA's terrestrial storage regulations remain compatible with progressive devel opments for the trans portation of CO2 to the injection well sites.

Individual Response: EPA clarifies that regula tion of CO2 pipelines is outside the scope of the GS rulemaking. Rather, the purpose of the Class VI GS rule is to ensure consistency in permitting underground injection of CO2 at GS operations across the United States and provide requirements to prevent endangerment of USDWs in anticipation of the eventual use of GS to

reduce CO2 emissions.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21617 Letter Lines: 338 to 383

Comment Code: 5560 2.10.3 Enhancing the public particip ation process (seeking comment)

Comment: Public Acceptance

G. Public Participation

15Recommendation G: Adopt the existing requir ements for public participation in programs under the Safe Drinking Water Act at 40 CFR Part 25 and 40 CFR Part

124.

Historical illustrations of community re sistance to a range of proposed CCS projects would suggest that EPA policies which truncate the tec hnical aspects of CO2 storage from the social and cultura l values held by targeted localities carry a high degree of likelihood for public opposition. A 2008 Congressional Research Report, Community Acceptance of Carbon Capture and Sequestration Infrastructure: Siting Challenges cite s public opposition as an important

consideration in the successful formulat ion of national CCS policy in general, and local resistance as a key ingredie nt in the appropriate siting of geosequestration projects in pa rticular. The Report warns:

Community opposition could complicate and delay each element of CCS implementation, potentially adding year s to a national CCS deployment. Alternatively, community concerns could lead to a national patchwork of CCS projects constructed only in publicly acceptable geographies (or on public lands), creating inter-regional disparitie s and failing to meet congressional objectives (http://assets.opencrs .com/rpts/RL34601_20080729.pdf at CRS-28).

As a general rule, community concerns regarding CCS will fall into three categories: health and safety, economic, and environmental. In 2007, two studies involving residents of California's Cent ral Valley expressed the following concerns about proposed geos questration projects in their areas: a risk of

carbon dioxide release and/or an increas e in seismic activity [health and safety]; the lowering of property values and/or the raising of cost-of-living [economic]; the disruptive construction of a pipeline infrastructure for transporting the CO2 to the proposed site and/or a negative change to the character of the community [environmen tal] (see "Community" at CRS-16).

While it is unrealistic to expect that every contentious rationale raised by local residents can be overcome through tr ust-building strategies instituted by governments and businesses, it is well- r ecognized that a subs tantial number of legitimate grievances can be allayed ' up- front' with the structuring of participatory permitting processes. In cas es where residents can be convinced that benefits to their community will outwe igh anticipated costs, that the risks are clearly articulated and will be comp etently managed, sufficient community acceptance can be garnered in order to proceed. Establishing procedural mechanisms for public citizens to express genuine concerns relating to proposed geosequestration sites under the new EP A regulations can pr ovide opportunities for solving disputes before they become intractable.

Individual Response: EPA believes that the existing UIC p ublic participation requirements as specified in 40 CFR 25 and 40 CFR 124 are ap propriate for GS projects. GS permitting

16authorities must follow the existing public part icipation requirements for UIC permits as specified in 40 CFR Part 124. Thes e regulations lay out the pro cedures for decision making and include requirements such as requiring the Direct or to notify the public re garding the availability of the draft permit and allow him or her to require a public hearing on the draft permit.

In addition, because of the unique nature of GS projects, and the anticipated level of public interest in GS projects, EPA encourages early pu blic involvement in GS projects. Providing the public with accurate, project specifi c information in the early stages of each GS project can help clarify project details and avoid public misper ceptions about the nature and safety of GS projects, and will allow a potential GS owner or operator and the permitting agency to address the public's concerns before the permitting process is complete.

Furthermore, the Agency recognizes that the ini tial phases of site evalua tion and site selection may begin in advance of permit application s ubmission. The public may become aware of these activities and begin to have questions or conc erns about the pending project. For this reason,
outreach and education—which are outside of, but complementary to, the public notification process—can help clarify project details and a void public misperceptions about the nature and safety of GS projects. This may also benef it the owner or operator by improving local acceptance

of the site.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21618 Letter Lines: 385 to 431

Comment Code: 8000 4.1 Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice

Comment: H. Environmental Justice and th e Siting of Injection Wells

Recommendation H: Acknowledge the clear potential for environmental justice

issues to be involved in the siting of Class VI inj ection wells, and formulate mandatory protocols for addressing those issues within the permitting process.

California's Central Valley is a particularly valuable example for illustrating the importance of both techni cal and social considerati ons in establishing the permitting protocols for Class VI injection wells. The Central Valley has been consistently identified as a primary location for CCS projects by the DOE, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and British Petroleum -- among ot hers. The DOE has entered into an agreement with Clean Energy Systems for a pilot CCS project at a natural gas power plant in Kern county, and BP has applied to the California Energy Commission for approval of a proposed projec t. Thus, employing certain technical considerations alone, the Central Valley is ideal for early CCS deployment. However, a history of economic and social issues in the region has served to heighten public resistan ce to such projects.

Due to previous identification as a re gion with economically disadvantaged populations, dangerously poor air quality, and degraded wildlife habitats, the

17Central Valley has become the focus of numerous governmental and nonprofit interventions, including ongoing EPA sancti ons for violations of the Clean Air Act. Typically, when new industrial developm ents seek to become established in the region, they will be opposed unless th ey can be shown to carry greater

benefits than costs to local communities . Because all three categories (health and safety, economic, and environmental) are interdependent in the Central Valley, the ability to ameliorate or solve any specific grievance becomes more

difficult.

In its comments to the proposed regulati ons, the EPA states: "Existing electric power generation plants that burn fossil fuels may be more prevalent in areas with high percentages of people who are minorities or have lower incomes on average, but it is hard to predict wher e new plants with CCS will be built." This statement fails to acknowledge the large prevalence of proposed geologic storage sites near existing oil and gas fields and/or currently operational power plants. Every study by industry a nd business consultant s has concluded that CO2 storage is most economically feasib le when sited as close to the source of emissions as possible. Whether CO2 is defined as an industrial commodity or a hazardous waste product, it is incompatib le with storage in high income residential population centers. It is most likely that GS sites will be proposed in areas of similar populations to thos e communities, like California's Central Valley, that have histories of economic disadvantage, of environmental degradation from industrial developments, and of chronic health issues among the general populace, especially children. Ther efore, it is of utmost importance for the EPA to mandate protocols for addressi ng environmental justice issues which will most likely be attendant to a large percentage of GS permit applications.

Individual Response: EPA clarifies that siting of GS pr ojects is based on the presence of appropriate geologic formations that can receive and confine the total volume of CO2 anticipated to be injected under §146.83(a)(2 ). The GS regulation at §146.82 requires owners/operators to collect and submit extensive geological data on th e proposed GS site, including an assessment of the geologic, hydrogeologic, geochemical, and geom echanical properties of the proposed GS site

to ensure that GS wells are located in suitabl e formations and that USDWs are protected from endangerment.

EPA also emphasizes that the purpose of the GS rule is to protect USDWs through permitting, siting, construction, operation, in jection, and post-injection s ite care and site closure requirements that are tailored to address the unique nature of GS . The Class VI requirements, in turn, minimize health risks to all populations , including minority and low-income populations.

EPA is developing guidance for UI C Directors that places emphasi s on considering the potential impact of any GS permits on communities such as minority and low income populations when evaluating Class VI injection well permit applica tions, as well as provide s suggestions and tools for targeted outreach to ensure more meaningful public input and partic ipation from the most affected communities during the permit evaluation and approval process. Additionally, as part of the permitting process pursuant to requirements at 40 CFR Part 124 the public has an opportunity

18to review public notices on GS permit applications , participate in hearings related to GS permit decisions, and inform permit writers of any envi ronmental justice concerns associated with a specific GS project.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21619 Letter Lines: 433 to 456

Comment Code: 1280 1.1.2.1 General comments on climate change/ global warming

Comment: I. CCS and a 'Clean Energy Future'

Recommendation I: Encourage public accepta nce of CCS by emphasizing it as one part of a strategic plan for eff ecting a Clean Energy Future'.

A prominent theme in public opposition to CCS is the concern that geologic storage will prolong our dependence on foss il fuels and divert the necessary funds for developing sustainable energy re sources in the US. In addition to providing protocols for public outrea ch, education, and dialogue about geosequestration siting, the EPA has an oppor tunity during these early stages of implementation of national CCS policies to frame social perceptions of geologic storage as part of a larger set of st rategies for achieving a 'Clean Energy Future.' The Sierra Club strongly recomme nds that the EPA partner with the DOE and other federal agencies to garner public support fo r CCS by characterizing it as one of several policy measures designe d to reduce the overa bundance of CO2 in our atmosphere. While CO2 capture is outside the scope of these proposed regulations for CO2 injection and storage, it is important to recognize that many opponents of CCS in general are fearfu l that the development of CO2 capture technology will prolong our reliance on coal for electrical generation, thus delaying deployment of renewable energy resources such as wind, solar, and geothermal. By promoting the adoption of "companion carbon c ontrol strategies" such as energy efficiency, energy conservation, and renewable energy electrical generation, the EPA can help position CCS as one constituent of a broader integrated objective.

Individual Response: EPA clarifies that the Class VI GS regulation does not promote or encourage the use of GS; rather the purpose of th e rule is to ensure consistency in permitting underground injection of CO2 at GS operations across the United States and provide requirements to prevent endangerment of USDWs in anticipation of the eventual use of GS to reduce CO2 emissions. EPA agrees that GS is one technology in a portfolio of options, including energy conservation, efficiency improvements, a nd the use of alternative fuels and renewable energy sources, that could be deployed to re duce CO2 emissions. However, the use of and investment in these technologies is outside the scope of the Class VI GS rulemaking. The Class VI GS requirements are designed to ensure that , where GS is deployed, projects are permitted, sited, constructed, operated, and closed in a ma nner that protects USDWs from endangerment.

19Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21620 Letter Lines: 458 to 492

Comment Code: 1280 1.1.2.1 General comments on climate change/ global warming

Comment Code: 1480 1.2.2.2.2 CO2 is not a pollutant

Comment: J. CO2 as a Valuable Commodity

Recommendation J: Re-frame public per ceptions of CO2 as a hazardous waste material by funding CCS demonstration projec ts which biologically or chemically

transform CO2 into va luable products.

Localities that oppose the permitting of geol ogic sequestration projects usually hold the perception that CO2 is a toxic wa ste material being dumped and buried in their backyards. Typically, localities are distrustful of the motivations of business and government representatives w ho seek to allay fears of economic,
health, and environmental ri sks attendant to pumping CO 2 into injection wells. An important avenue for re-framing su ch perceptions is by emphasizing CCS

methods which value carbon dioxide as a na turally occurring and commercially valuable resource. The DOE's carbon sequest ration program at the National Energy Technology Laboratory includes funding for rese arch and development of advanced chemical and biological approaches, including systems for decarbonization, photosynthesis, and conversion of CO2 into useful forms. However, since no demonstration projects have been a nnounced over the same time period that multiple geosequestration projects have been implemented, the DOE's "Novel Carbon Sequestration Concepts" program appears to be under- publicized and under-funded. This lack of vigor in pr omoting carbon transformation methods gives the public the impre ssion that CCS technologies ar e being readied solely for the purpose of perpetuating our depe ndency on fossil fuels for electricity generation and manufact uring processes.

Numerous business ventures are seeking oppor tunities to prove the efficacy of their carbon mineralization processes with larger demonstration projects. Companies holding proprietary patents for us eful CO2-sequestered materials such

as calcium carbonate cement and cons truction materials, paper products, biodegradable plastics, and algae biofue ls need government funding and support to scale-up their methods. By narrowly targ eting geosequestrati on as the primary carbon storage solution, the federal govern ment is missing an opportunity to secure broader public acceptance of CCS as a safe and viable method for reducing the overabundance of CO2 in our atmosphere , and is neglecting important avenues for achieving that goal.

Individual Response: EPA acknowledges that GS falls within the broader context of CCS and the need for regulatory clarity to ensure that USDWs are protected from endangerment. In developing the final GS rule, the Office of Water coordinated with other Agency program offices and across federal agencies (e.g., with the Depart ment of Energy; United States Geological Survey; Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement, formerly the

20Minerals Management Service; and the Bureau of Land Management). The Agency continues to evaluate areas of potential appli cability of other Federa l environmental statutes including, but not
limited to: the Clean Air Act; the Resource Cons ervation and Recovery Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabili ty Act; and the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act to various aspects of GS a nd CCS. The Agency will continue to coordinate

on GS and CCS related issues to minimize redunda ncy and maximize efficiencies for owners or operators. For additional information, please s ee the discussion entitled "How Does This Rulemaking Relate to Other Federal Authorities and GS and CCS Activities?" in the preamble to

the final GS rule.

EPA adds that the intent of the GS rule is not to promote GS. Rather , the purpose of the GS regulation is to assure that, where deployed, GS is conducted in a manner that protects USDWs from endangerment.

The Agency acknowledges that there is ongoing research in many fields that could address the broader environmental concern of climate change, but the focus of the Class VI requirements is to ensure that, where GS is deployed, it is conducted in a manner that protects USDWs from endangerment.

Much of the research on terres trial and geologic sequestration is being conducted by other federal agencies, particularly DOE 's Office of Science and Technology (www.energy.gov/sciencetech/carbonse questration.htm). Other fede ral agencies involved in research include the US Department of Agricu lture, US Geological Survey, and others. EPA's Office of Research and Developmen t is also researching issues re lated to global climate change, including geologic and te rrestrial sequestration.

Letter ID: 0133 Comment ID: 21621 Letter Lines: 494 to 507

Comment Code: 1420 1.2.1.1 Support the GS rulemaking

Comment Code: 1510 1.2.2.3 Need for additional study

Comment: Conclusion

Although the proposed EPA regulations are no t designed to address the presence of overabundant CO2 in our atmosphere, the Sierra Club urges the EPA to continue fulfilling its mandate to protect the environment by working with the DOE and other federal agencies to construct a c ohesive body of regulations for all CCS methods, and to expand the current purvie w from attention to the subsurface movement of CO2 to include the atmospheric dimensions of the i ssues as a whole. Additionally, the Sierra Club urges the EPA, DOE, and ot her federal agencies to substantially increase their commitme nt to the funding of research and development for alternatives to geologic storage, such as innovative biological and chemical approaches to carbon se questration, thereby increasing public acceptance of CCS as an important tool fo r cleaning the atmosphere during this period of transition to an optimal use of sustainable energy resources.

2122 Individual Response: EPA acknowledges that the issue of GS falls within the broader context of CCS, but clarifies that the scope of the GS regulation is limited to injection of CO2, and that all requirements in the GS rule are designed for the purpose of protecting USDWs from endangerment. The SDWA does not provide the UIC Program with the authority to develop regulations for all areas related to GS, such as releases to the atmosphere.

EPA agrees that continued research will be in tegral to development of GS technology. The Agency believes that establishing a regulator y framework for the future development and deployment of CCS technology provides a framewor k for injecting CO2 so that the activity does not result in endangerment of US DWs. EPA is using an adaptive approach to regulating GS under the UIC Program. Even after finalization of the GS regulation, the Agency plans to collect and review data every six years on GS projects to determine whether the appropriate amount and types of information and appropriate documenta tion are being collected, and to determine if modifications to the requirements are appropria te or necessary. Please also see the preamble section entitled, “What Steps Did EPA Take to Develop This Rulemaking?”

EPA acknowledges the need for regulatory clarit y to ensure that USDW s are protected from endangerment. In developing the final GS rule , the Office of Water coordinated with other Agency program offices and across federal agen cies (e.g., with the Department of Energy; United States Geological Survey; Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement, formerly the Minerals Mana gement Service; and the Bureau of Land Management). The Agency continues to evaluate areas of potential applicability of other Federal

environmental statutes incl uding, but not limited to: the Clean Air Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Comprehe nsive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; and the Marine Protection, Resear ch and Sanctuaries Act to various aspects of GS and CCS. The Agency will continue to coordinate on GS and CCS related issues to minimize redundancy and maximize efficiencies for owners or operators. For additional information, please see the discussion entitle d "How Does This Rulemaking Relate to Other Federal

Authorities and GS and CCS Activities?" in the preamble to the final GS rule.

The Agency acknowledges that there is ongoing research in many fields that could address the broader environmental concern of climate change, but the focus of the Class VI requirements is to ensure that, where GS is deployed, it is conducted in a manner that protects USDWs from endangerment.

Much of the research on terres trial and geologic sequestration is being conducted by other federal agencies, particularly DOE 's Office of Science and Technology (www.energy.gov/sciencetech/carbonse questration.htm). Other fede ral agencies involved in research include the US Department of Agricu lture, US Geological Survey, and others. EPA's Office of Research and Developmen t is also researching issues re lated to global climate change, including geologic and te rrestrial sequestration.