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.EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0390-0138

Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0390-0138

Last Name: Anonymous3

First Name:

Title:

Organization:

City:

State:

Zip Code:

Phone Number:

Fax Number:

Country Code:

Email Address:

Current Category Code: 260

Comment:

Dear Administrator Johnson and EPA staff: I urge you to take immediate action

and rule that carbon dioxide and other global warming pollutants clearly

"endanger the public health and welfare" and thus should be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Carbon dioxide (CO2) pollution is the primary cause of the

climate crisis. We're already seeing dramatic and dangerous climate effects

today, and the climate crisis threatens the very livability of our planet for

our children. We must reduce CO2 pollution now. Rather than continue to rely on

polluting fossil fuels, we can "Repower America" by using energy sources that

don't emit CO2, and make the switch to 100% clean electricity.

Page 1Letter ID: 0138

Commenter: Anonymous3

Letter ID: 0138 Comment ID: 23078 Letter Lines: 16 to 24

Comment Code: 1290 1.1.2.2 Comments that EPA should regulate CO2 as a pollutant

Comment: Dear Administrator Johnson and EPA staff: I urge you to take immediate action

and rule that carbon dioxide and othe r global warming pollutants clearly

"endanger the public health a nd welfare" and thus should be regulated under the

Clean Air Act. Carbon dioxide (CO2) po llution is the primar y cause of the

climate crisis. We're already seeing dramatic and dangerous climate effects

today, and the climate crisis threatens the very livability of our planet for

our children. We must reduce CO2 pollution now. Rather than continue to rely on

polluting fossil fuels, we can "Repower America" by using en ergy sources that

don't emit CO2, and make the switch to 100% clean electricity.

Individual Response: EPA clarifies that the Class VI GS requirements are designed 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. The requirements apply to ow ners or operators of

injection wells used to inject CO2 for perman ent storage. The Class VI GS rulemaking is

promulgated under Safe Drinking Water Act author ity and does not relate to any endangerment

and cause or contribute findings under the Clean Air Act. The Class VI GS requirements do not

depend upon, and are unaffected by, Clean Air Act endangerment and cause or contribute

findings.

The Agency clarifies that the us e of “clean electricity” is outside the scope of the GS rulemaking.

More information on EPA's Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse

Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act can be found at

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html.

1