Tribal Comment Letter Template
NOTE—NTAA recommends that you begin your Tribe’s comment letter
with introductory remarks regarding the signatory’s position with the Tribe
and include somewhere in the letter a description of the Tribe’s physical
environment and any particular concerns the Tribe has with respect to
climate change. The more individual each Tribe’s letter is, the greater its
potential impact. Feel free to add you own arguments, objections or support
for various aspects of the proposal. Comments are due May 9th
May 9, 2014
Carbon Pollution Standards for New Power Plants
Attention Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code: 2822T
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,
Washington, DC, 20460
Subject:
Carbon Pollution Standards for New Power Plants
Introduction
The (Name of Tribe) is pleased to submit these comments regarding the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)’s proposed Carbon Pollution Standards for
New Power Plants (hereinafter “The Carbon Rule”).
The (Name of Tribe) understands that President Obama’s Climate Action Plan directs
EPA to establish carbon pollution standards for both new and existing power plants that
burn coal and natural gas, and that the Proposed Rule provides such standards for new
electric utility generating units (EGUs). Specifically, the Proposed Rule outlines
standards of performance for:
1. Natural gas-fired turbines based on modern, efficient natural gas combined cycle
technology; and
2. Fossil fuel-fired electric utility steam generating units (boilers) and integrated
gasification combined cycle (IGCC) units that use partial carbon capture and
sequestration (CCS).
EPA finds that the proposed standards are the best systems of emissions reduction
(BSER) for the specified unit types.
The (Name of Tribe) finds that the proposed standards under the Proposed Rule will help
reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from EGUs that have gone uncontrolled for a
very long time, and that these standards lay the foundation necessary for EPA’s
forthcoming proposal to address CO2 emissions from existing EGUs. As a complement
to the (Name of Tribe)’s general approval of the Proposed Rule, the (Name of Tribe)
provides its comments and recommendation regarding the use of partial CCS in the
second set of standards identified above; the operating rolling month averages proposed
by EPA for maintaining compliance under the Proposed Rule; and the amount of Tribal
consultation that was conducted by EPA with respect to the Proposed Rule. The (Name
of Tribe) must preface its comments and recommendations by advising EPA about what
climate change means to Indian Tribes.
Indian Tribes and Climate Change
EPA provides that greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution threatens the American public's
health and welfare by contributing to long-lasting changes in our climate that can have a
range of negative effects on human health and the environment. The impacts vary
regionally and seasonally and may include longer, more intense and more frequent heat
waves; more intense precipitation events and storm surges; less precipitation and more
prolonged drought; and increased ground level ozone pollution, otherwise known as
smog, which has been linked to asthma and premature death. The negative health effects
associated with air pollution are especially damaging for vulnerable populations
including children, the elderly, and those with heart and respiratory problems.
Indian Tribes are not immune from the effects of climate change. Like the rest of the
nation, its populations are suffering from the health effects of climate change. Further,
Tribes are seeing the effects of climate change through increased storm surges, erosion,
and flooding; prolonged droughts never seen in modern times; and increased fires and
insect pest outbreaks in their forests. These are only a few snapshots of what is
happening on and around the lands of this nation’s 566 federally recognized Indian
Tribes.
Tribes are affected much differently than the rest of the nation as their cultures are
integrated into the ecosystems of North America; and many Tribal economies are heavily
dependent on the use of fish, wildlife, and native plants. Even where Tribal economies
are integrated into the national economy, Tribal cultural identities continue to be deeply
rooted in the natural environment. As climate change disrupts biological communities,
the survival of some Tribes as distinct cultures may be at risk. The loss of traditional
cultural practices, due to climate-driven die-off or range shift of culturally significant
plant and animal species, may prove to be too much for some Tribal cultures to withstand
on top of other external pressures that they face.
Climate-driven disruption of biological communities is having a considerable effect on
the treaty rights of Indian Tribes. Many such treaties preserve hunting, fishing, and
gathering rights for Tribes on their lands and in the usual and accustomed areas. Some
Tribes are finding that the animals and plants on which they depend for their cultural
practices and identity have either migrated to lands not under their jurisdiction or have
disappeared altogether. How does one begin to valuate this type of loss for a Tribe?
Further, CO2 emitted today can remain in the atmosphere up to 100 years, meaning that
the full impacts of these emissions on Tribes and their culture may not be seen until many
years into the future.
Uncontrolled CO2 emissions as well as the emissions of other GHGs must stop in order to
protect Indian Tribes and their cultures, not only for current generations, but also for
future generations to come.
Partial CCS
EPA favors the use of partial CCS with new fossil fuel-fired boilers and IGCC units,
finding that it is technically feasible; can be implemented at a reasonable cost; promotes
deployment and further development of technology; and offers operators considerable
operational flexibility.
The (Name of Tribe) finds that using partial CCS strikes a good balance between
economics and the environment. Economically, it may be easier for EGU owners and
operators to absorb financially the cost of incorporating partial CCS versus full CCS.
Further, depending on the location of EGUs, owners and operators will have an
opportunity to use or sell their captured CO2 for enhanced oil recovery. This technology
will help to prevent significant amounts of CO2 from being emitted into the atmosphere.
Operating Month Rolling Average
EPA proposes two types of emission compliance options for new fossil fuel-fired boilers
and IGCC units: 1,100 pounds of CO2 per Megawatt-hour over a 12-operating month
rolling average, or between 1,000 and 1,050 pounds of CO2 per Megawatt-hour over an
84-operating month rolling average. EPA finds that using an 84-operating month rolling
average would provide owners and operators of new fossil fuel-fired boilers and IGCC
units with operational flexibility over a longer time period to meet the reduced CO 2
emissions requirements and would more easily absorb short-term emission increases for
such boilers and units.
The (Name of Tribe) supports EPA offering plant operators the choice to maintain the
84-operating month rolling average standard or the 12-operating month rolling average
standard. The (Name of Tribe) wants to see CO2 emission reductions, but not at a
substantial cost to the owners and operators of new fossil fuel-fired boilers and IGCC
units. Offering plant owners the option between an 84 and 12-operating month rolling
average standard, allows for a high degree of flexibility, which we expect will foster the
successful adoption of these new standards.
Tribal Consultation
EPA provides that the Proposed Rule does “not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175.” The basis for EPA’s finding is that the Proposed Rule will
neither have substantial direct compliances costs on Tribal governments nor preempt
Tribal law. Further, EPA indicates that the Proposed Rule will affect new sources in
Indian Country only, and not existing ones. The (Name of Tribe) is perplexed by this
last comment from EPA. Why shouldn’t Tribes be concerned about new sources being
established in Indian Country? EPA may not be aware of Tribal interests in this matter
because the consultation that is conducted with Tribes was insufficient.
Too often, EPA makes assertions about proposed rules and regulations not having
impacts to Indian Tribes when referring to Executive Order (EO) 13175. However, the
(Name of Tribe) finds that EPA does not understand EO 13175 fully or the intent behind
it. EO 13175 requires EPA to develop an accountability process to ensure “meaningful
and timely input by development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.”
While there may have been meaningful input provided by Tribes about CO2 emissions
from EGUs, it was not specific to the Proposed Rule nor was it timely.
EPA provides that consultation letters were sent to 584 Tribal leaders regarding its
development of new source performance standards and EGU emission guidelines, and
that a consultation/outreach meeting was held on May 23, 2011. That was almost three
years ago and EPA is on its second proposed rule with the first one being proposed in
April 2012. One public hearing was held in Washington, D.C. earlier this year. The few
additional conference calls and outreach meetings since then do not pass the muster of
what was intended by EO 13175 and true government-to-government consultation. EPA
must not only do better in consulting with Tribes on the Proposed Rule, but must also
consult with them regarding the Rule’s implementation.
Conclusion
The (Name of Tribe) finds that the Proposed Rule will help protect human and
ecosystem health as well as culturally significant, vulnerable, and endemic species by
reducing the CO2 emissions from new EGUs. Propagating this rule will help mitigate the
long-term ecological shifts and impacts to human communities associated with climate
change.
In summary, the (Name of Tribe) is pleased to provide the aforementioned comments
concerning EPA’s Carbon Rule.
(If appropriate, provide a staff contact that may be contacted if EPA has clarifying questions).