May 31, 2011

Kevin Culligan

USEPA Headquarters

Ariel Rios Building

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Mailcode:  6301A

Washington, D.C.  20460

RE:	Consultation call on New Source Performance Standards (NSPS’s) for
Greenhouse Gases (GHG) from Utilities

Dear Kevin:

My name is Joy Wiecks and I am the Air Quality Technician for the Fond
du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa (FdL).  Thank you for taking the
time to speak with us on the conference call held on May 23rd on the
above regulatory action.  FdL’s Air Coordinator, Alex Jackson, also
participated on the call.  We appreciated the chance to listen to you
explain the direction the above action is headed and to be able to ask
questions.  I wanted to put our verbal comments from the call in writing
and also include some thoughts that have occurred to us since the call.

First, thank you for undertaking this rulemaking.  As you know, the
utility sector contributes about 40% of the greenhouse gases emitted in
this country.  We see this rulemaking effort as a crucial step toward
starting to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.
However, the current proposal addresses only those sources agreed to in
the related settlement agreement, namely fossil fuel-fired boilers at
electric generating facilities that: combust more than 250 million
Btu/hour heat input; and sell more than one-third of their potential
electric output capacity; and supply more than 25 megawatts electric
output for sale.  FdL supports expanding the current proposal to also
include turbines from these facilities.

Second, although this point was brought up in the call FdL wants to
reiterate the EPA’s responsibility to write guidelines for controlling
existing sources as part of a Federal Implementation Plan, or to assist
tribes in making these guidelines part of a Tribal Implementation Plan,
so that they are enforceable in Indian Country.  Additionally, these
guidelines will probably allow for some discretion by states or tribes
when they promulgate rules.  One item that may be considered when
promulgating these guidelines is the remaining useful life of the plant.
 FdL believes that utilities should not be allowed to keep units in use
for decades beyond their original intent.  In order to encourage the
retirement of antiquated units, utilities should not be given leeway in
controlling their sources merely because those sources are old and the
costs of control equipment would be prohibitive.  If an affected unit is
proposing not to install controls based upon costs or upon the short
remaining useful life of the unit, please require permit conditions
stating that the source must be retired within three years or face
substantial compliance consequences.

Third, FdL recommends expressing control requirements in an output-based
manner (i.e. pounds of pollutant per kilowatt produced).  This will have
the effect of rewarding the most efficient units.  We also encourage the
development of a trading mechanism, with allowances to be awarded to
early reducers and to electrical sources that use renewable fuels.  We
believe this would be a great opportunity for tribes, many of whom fall
into these categories, to either receive monetary compensation for their
early efforts or to retire these credits.  We would also support some
type of emissions averaging, to allow flexibility for smoother, faster
reductions.  In the name of flexibility, FdL also supports the principal
of allowing state programs to be found equivalent to the NSPS.  We
expect such programs to be vetted by the EPA to ensure that they are,
indeed, credible programs.

FdL would also like to encourage the EPA to extend greenhouse gas
NSPS’s to regulate the off-grid, on-site electrical generators
operated at numerous facilities.  While an action of this sort may be
inappropriate in this rulemaking, please consider it for future
rulemakings.

Finally, FdL supports a phased approach to setting emissions standards,
such as described in Option #4 on page 29 of your slide presentation.
We feel this option offers a balance allowing for less stringent
measures early on, transitioning into more stringent requirements over
the long term, with an overall emphasis on getting rid of antiquated
technology that has outlived its initial purpose.

Thank you for this opportunity to participate in the early phases of
this rulemaking.  We would appreciate having another tribal conference
call after the rule comes out in draft form.  If you have any questions,
you can reach me at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Alex Jackson at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Sincerely,

Joy Wiecks

Fond du Lac Air Quality Technician

c.c.	Wayne Dupuis – Fond du Lac Environmental Program Director

	Dennis Peterson – Fond du Lac Legal Counsel

	Darrel Harmon – EPA HQ

	Laura McKelvey – EPA OAQPS

	Ben Giwojna – EPA Region 5

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 53 (Monday, March 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 16029]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6505]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER12-1228-000]

High Majestic Wind II, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
High Majestic Wind II, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 2, 2012.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 13, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-6505 Filed 3-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P