With the vast number of compliance options available for meeting the requirements of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan (CPP), it can be difficult for state regulators to know where to begin. The EPA set forth targets for each state based on four building blocks for meeting compliance. However, once the rule is finalized, states can look well beyond these building blocks in crafting their compliance plans. At a meeting of the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), Ken Colburn shed some light on navigating a clear path to an approvable, least-cost compliance plan.The wide variety of compliance options afforded state regulators under the CPP is an unusual opportunity, allowing states to create a plan tailored to their specific needs. Mr. Colburn encouraged state energy officials to capitalize on this opportunity by thinking outside of the “building block box,” considering integrated, multi-pollutant strategies that leverage least-cost, least-risk strategies, such as energy efficiency, and exploring the potential for a regional plan or modular approach. Mr. Colburn emphasized the differences between a state implementation plan (SIP) under Section 110 of the Clean Air Act and a 111(d) compliance plan, which offers states more flexibility. Failure to recognize this difference could result in higher costs, fewer options, and less innovation in meeting the 111(d) requirements.