Air Managers Committee: Meetings and Calls

NAM Conference Call Minutes, May 3, 2000

MEMORANDUM

TO: Dan Olson, Air Quality Administrator
FROM: Lee Gribovicz, Regional Impacts/E.I. Coordinator
SUBJECT: WRAP Northern Air Managers Telephone Conference Call Minutes
DATE: May 3, 2000

Summary

On May 3, 2000, a telephone conference call was held by the Northern Air Manager's (NAM) Committee of the Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP). The business of this call was devoted to discussion the status of three NAM funding issues: 1) support for development of a Regional Haze SIP/TIP template, 2) support of the WRAP Emissions Forum for conducting a survey of the state of preparation and availability of Emission Inventory data in the WRAP, and 3) support for development of a Reasonably Attributable (RA) BART Guidance document.

There was also brief discussion of the future role of the NAM committee within the WRAP, the NAM activities report for the annual WRAP meeting in Phoenix, and the inclusion of South Dakota in NAM.

A phone role call indicated the following list of participants on the call:

Name /Organization

Bob Lebens / WESTAR Technical Coordinator
Randy Ashley / Salish & Kootenai Tribes
Raman Iyer / Chehalis Tribe
Rose M. Lee / Yakama Nation
Dana Mount / State of North Dakota
Dan Olson / State of Wyoming
Lee Gribovicz / State of Wyoming (Emissions Forum)
Tim Teeter / State of Idaho
Bob Raisch / State of Montana
Annette Liebe / State of Oregon
Jean Goodman / State of South Dakota
 

Conference Call Details

Regional Haze SIP/TIP Template

This SIP/TIP template project is to be conducted by WESTAR, and according to Pat Cummins, has been approved. A contract is expected to be in place by May 10^th.

Emission Inventory Survey

Dan Olson reported the confusion surrounding the status of this proposed survey at the EI forum. Lee Gribovicz, a member of that forum, indicated that the EF had discussed the survey at their last meeting in Portland April 5-7^th, and had a survey form essentially completed at that time. Some small revisions were made and Sally Otterson of Washington DEQ was completing the form. Mr. Gribovicz completed a draft Scope of Work on April 25^th, and that is now in the hands of the EF Co-Chair, Mike George. The anticipated schedule is:

June 1, 2000 WRAP review of SOW completed/Request for Proposals issued
June 15, 2000 deadline for receiving bids, contract awarded
June 30, 2000 complete survey review and send out the package
August 15, 2000 deadline for receiving survey responses
September 1, 2000 deadline for completing report summary & analysis
September ??, 2000 Emission Inventory Forum meeting (to be scheduled)

This Survey would be sent to state and local air quality agencies within the WRAP region. The Tribal Data Development Working Group of the WRAP has already taken steps to evaluate the availability emissions data on tribal lands in the WRAP region, therefore this survey will be directed at non-tribal air quality agencies to determine the state of preparation and availability of EI data in the WRAP region. The information will be used to identify areas of concern, and to prioritize WRAP resources and efforts in creating the organization's Regional EI System.

Bob Raisch wondered whether the survey would indicate to the recipients, what emission information would be expected of them by WRAP, and Rose Lee wondered whether this survey project would help solve emission inventory problems. Mr. Gribovicz indicated that this survey effort was not intended to deliver information out to agencies, but rather to gather information in about the state of EI preparation in the WRAP region. An element of the project then requires the contractor to statistically summarize the responses to the survey, and complete an analysis of the results to assess where the gaps exist and what problems are faced.

Regarding project funding, the EF has preliminarily discussed the NAM offer to provide support funding for this project, and during the RFP preparation process, the EF Co-Chairs will evaluate their budget and contact NAM to resolve the funding question.

Dana Mount and Bob Raisch expressed approval for funding this effort, and the general tone of the call was to support the EI effort. The question of whether this project would look at the borders surrounding the WRAP region (mid-west states, Canada, Mexico) came up, and Mr. Gribovicz explained that the EF would be including emission data from these buffer areas in the modeling inventory. It was not, however, the intent to include these areas in the distribution of this survey.

Dana Mount was concerned that the eastern states of the WRAP (North Dakota, & soon to include South Dakota) will be impacting Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, etc., and therefore needed as good inventory information for these areas as the rest of the WRAP. Mr. Gribovicz assured him that the EF was thoroughly considering the problems of these buffer areas. Mr. Mount mentioned the upcoming meeting of Regional Planning Groups, May 15^th in Dallas, and it was suggested that the issue of consistency should be brought up at that level as well.

RA BART Guidance

The NAM committee has been interested in what happens when RA BART is applied to Class I, over and above the restrictions developed under the Regional Haze Rule. It was noted that industry has expressed deep concern, and wants to know what they'll be faced with under RA BART. WESTAR has developed a Phase I task of researching the current state of knowledge on RA BART, to determine what's been done in the past. There is a $12,719 contract to support conference calls, meetings and travel for six participants

Annette Liebe, Bob Raisch and Dana Mount verbalized the general feeling of the NAM participants on this call, in favor of supporting this effort.

NAM Annual Report/Future

Dan Olson noted that he has to report on NAM activities at the Annual WRAP meeting, and that basically he would report that the Northern Air Managers are acting as a focal point for WRAP to look at the broad picture of regional haze, and not solely focus on 309 implementation. It was apparent to NAM representatives that the WRAP forums were looking at the full WRAP region, and Annette Liebe noted that there was discussion within NAM of whether and when that committee may eventually no longer be needed.

Also, there was discussion of the status of South Dakota, and it was noted that the WRAP would vote on that states' inclusion (along with California) at the upcoming annual meeting. With South Dakota's Jean Goodman on the call, it was suggested that she send a letter of request to join the NAM Committee, with approval of NAM members sought after the WRAP's vote in Phoenix.