Agenda


## Meeting with EPA rule writers regarding Environmental Justice & the Clean Power Plan

September 17, 2014

Call in: 1

- 866

- 299

- 3188 x5624 Passcode: 919

- 541

- 5624

Meeting o bjectives:

• To provide an overview of how the EPA addressed the requirements set forth by Executive Order 12898 in the proposed Clean Power Plan

• To engage in a discussion around specific concerns from EJ Advocates

• To assess the ‘best next steps’ for EJ constituencies to influence the outcome of the final rule

10:00

– 10:05 Introductio ns Ms. Laura McKe lvey

R eview objectives of meeting Dr. Jalonne L. White

- Newsome

10:05

– 10: 12 Overview of how the EPA’s EJ analysis approach for rules

10:12

– 10: 20 EPAs approach to an EJ analysis for the Clean Power Plan

10:20

– 10:40 EJ Stakeholder Questions (EJ leaders will share questions on 4 key areas of concern)

EJ Analysis: Ms. Sharon Lewis

Title VI/Civil Rights: Dr. Nicky Sheats

Economic/Social Justice: Rev. Leo Woodbury & Dr. Erica Holloman

10:40

– 10:55 EPA Response

10:55

– 11:00 Next steps

1Specific Questions from interested EJ Stakeholders

Technical Questions

1. We feel that the EJ Analysis conducted was insufficient, as addressed in the section that discusses the Executive Order. Why was a more thorough EJ analysis not conducted on the
Clean Power Plan

, if it was noted that in the Plan text that there could be some disproportionate impacts in certain regions of the country? Additionally,

a. Did the Agency meet the requirements set forth in Executive Order 12898 and 12550?
b. Why were States NOT instructed to take ‘equity’ into account in their state implementation plans?

c. Why wasn’t the Draft Solid Waste Rule as a ‘template’ for analysis?

2. How will EPA ensure compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act given allowance of cap and
trade a nd the Rule’s EJ analysis that acknowledges localized air pollution increases ? Why was an analysis of Cap and Trade not conducted?

3. As the rule is written, it definitely is slanted towards states engaging in cap and t rade program
conversations. This rul e also offers some other mitigation options that are of concern and have the potential for disparate impacts from states selecting other mitigation options, such as biomass incineration, carbon capture and sequestration, the use of nuclear energy and

switc hing to natural gas. How will this plan insure the potentially for disproportionate impacts
are accounted for?

4. How are you ensuring with this proposed rule that reductions come from the source and not from somewhere else other than the electricity genera ting unit? (i.e. how are you making sure pollution is reduced where the pollution is coming from?)

5. How will EPA ensure that the cost of implementing the Clean Power Plan are not passed on to the low income consumers by the electric utilities and cooperatives, resulting in economic injustice? How can savings to consumers because of renewable energy generation or energy efficiency be retained by the consumers and not be gobbled up by the utilities and cooperatives, leaving those least able to pay st ill financially strapped. Can a cap on leasing programs and energy savings to consumers be capped?

6. Is there any advantage or disadvan tage

– that you can tell

– to choosing the proposed goals vs. the alternative goals?

7. With the potential coal plant retir ements that could occur in certain areas, will these retirements be used as ‘credits’ for states or will the states still be responsible for achieving the set emission targets?

28. Federal EPA will have the sole responsibility of monitoring how states are act ually achieving their emission goals during the compliance period? It was also noted in the Plan that States could choose some regulated entities to have ‘state review’ vs. ‘federal review’. Do you foresee this being a concern for EJ communities?

9. Has ther e been any analysis conducted by the agency to determine if there are any potential negative impacts of the selection between ‘rate and mass based’ emissions targets for states? If not, why and how can we make that happen?

10. The emphasis on shifting to Natural Gas Combined Cycle Plants is a concern. Has there been any analysis to determine the detrimental effects?

11. Will cumu lative impacts be stated or addressed in the proposed rule?

Engagement

12. How many people testified at the public hearings, in total ? Of the total, how many were environmental justice, community based organizations?

13. Just as there are trainings for communities about other Clean Air Rules (i.e. such as the Refinery rule) why or how can similar efforts be made to have these same types of trainings

– i.e. at already occurring meetings or in particularly crucial areas

– around the Clean Power Plan? (NEJAC, etc. )

14. Will or can there be any Agency resources to help us answer these questions before the comment period?

15. How realistic is it for us to be able to get some language into the final rule that will address the concerns mentioned above? Particularly, the need for an EJ analysis of this rule, and subsequent SIPs? We will be working in specific states as well, but w hat are your suggestions for making this a priority before the rule finalization? Can we work with you on making this happen?

3