IOC Meeting Minutes
January 10, 2000, Salt Lake City, Utah
Bob Amundson, Dave Mills, Dick Hayslip, Ursula Kramer, Tom Webb (for Amy Zimpfer), Andy Ginsburg, Vickie Patton (by phone), Chris Shaver
Others Present: C.V. Mathai, Jan Miller, David Steele, Mike Teague, Shawn Kendall, Colleen Delaney, Melanie Dean, Annette Liebe (by phone), Brian Fineran (by phone), Bill Grantham (by phone), Doug Latimer (by phone), Kevin Golden (by phone), Milt Russon
1. 308/309 White paper
Andy Ginsburg introduced the draft white paper prepared at the request of the IOC. Vicky, Sara, Annette and Brian were on the workgroup, as well as others.
The products are draft final; they do not include a tribal perspective. The purpose for the documents was to answer questions and help provide information on the regional haze rule.
Brian and Annette presented an overview of the table. The group discussed the table and memo. Andy asked if a possible goal for using this information would be as an advocacy piece for section 309.
Action:
Review the table and make any changes. Add a cover memo or letter which simply transmits the table. In the future we may want to develop a pros/cons memo/letter (perhaps after the annex is submitted).
Comments to Annette by 1/21/00 (liebe.annette@deq.state.or.us; 503.229.6919).
The IOC will have a T-Con 1/31 11a.m. mountain time to finalize the chart.
2. Market Trading Forum
Milt Russon provided an update and status report for the MTF.
1. 2000 baseline - This issue is still being discussed. The MTF feels they're close to resolution. This issue is key in determining the formula used to set the future milestones.
2. RA BART - This issue is still being discussed. There are some areas of discussion which are at an impasse. Resolution of this issue is not required by the regional haze rule for the annex. However, everyone clearly expressed their desire to reach resolution of this issue.
3. 13% reduction - This issue is still being discussed. There's a true-up question: is it 13% or should the number be adjusted? MTF will continue the technical work.
Action: The IOC will ask the EPA to give us an interpretation of the 13% requirement in the rule section 51.309(d)(4)(i) Implementation of Stationary Source Reductions - is this a reporting requirement or an actual emission reduction requirement. Will also add a brief paper outlining possible answers. If it's an actual emission reduction requirement does it just apply to 2000 or also to future years.
Dick Hayslip and Vickie Patton will each submit the written one-pager summaries outlining the issue by 1/18 to inform the EPA response. The documents will be emailed to the IOC, including Tom Webb and Larry Svoboda. The IOC requests that EPA respond by 1/31.
4. Allocations - Industry has been working on this issue and has not taken it back to the entire MTF yet.
5. The MTF is also discussing the averaging compliance period and monitoring.
6. There are other items that remain for discussion and resolution. One of the key issues is the averaging period for the milestones.
Discussion: How can the IOC help the MTF to resolve these issues? Milt: there are creative people on the MTF, but some new concepts and thoughts would be welcome in the groups that are working on this. The MTF could also use some help on the assessment portion of the trading program. The IOC could identify the issues that are potential "deal breakers" hopefully not more than one or two items; an IOC member could be assigned to track and help on those key issues.
Since there are a lot of areas where the MTF has reached agreement, we could begin informing and working with the PAB now and developing the outreach information.
The most difficult issues right now could benefit from some direct help from the IOC: (1) RA BART, (2) year 2000 projected actual, (3) definition of 13% reduction. The other issues include monitoring and tracking and allocations, which have not really been debated in the forum. The IOC has initiated action on item (3). Item (1), we could ask Vickie to be the IOC lead to approach that issue. Item (2) we let MTF and EIWG work on this until the end of the month.
Action Items:
3. Grant update
The WRAP submitted a $2 million budget request. EPA had already funded $500k. EPA is still reviewing the workplan to determine how to proceed with the remaining funding. Hopefully within the next two weeks the WRAP will receive the final $1.5 million for FY'99. EPA is also planning a visit to WGA to look at grants management issues. No decision has been made by EPA regarding how to spend the $5 million of national regional planning funding for FY'00. There will be $150k for the WRAP shortly.
4. Economic Analysis
There are three issues that have been raised:
1) Economic impacts on the energy industry in the west
2) Cost/benefit analysis including health and visibility impacts
3) Assessment of the relative cost of a market trading vs. command and control
The IOC is continuing to work on this issue. The subgroup consisting of Vickie, Dave, Chris and Ursula is continuing to address this issue. Sara Laumann will see if EPA has any tools that could be helpful in this effort.
Action: Conference call with the subgroup (include Bob Amundson) and Dave Brookshire and Fred Roach to get this going again. Scheduled for 1/13 at 2 pm mountain time.
5. Do we want to schedule a meeting with EPA including headquarters people to start briefing them on the MTF issues?
Action: Sara will mention to her EPA group that we're requesting a meeting. We could travel to Denver or Raleigh or wherever works for them.
Next IOC meetings:
T-Con 1/14, 11 am mountain time - primary purpose: discuss RA BART with Reuben, Bruce and Kevin
T-Con 1/31, 11 am mountain time - primary purpose: discuss the 308/309 white paper
Meeting 2/18, SLC, from 10 - 4. Location to be announced. |
Contact the Webmaster
