ERP Credit Workgroup 2005 Northeast Environmental Summit September 28, 2005 Sam Silverman – Moderator, EPA Region I Beth Termini – OPEI & Region I Steve DeGabriele – MA DEP Caroline Petti - OECA

ERP Credit Workgroup ERP Credit Workgroup - response to isssues raised by MA DEP’s request to EPA for ERP dry cleaner credit Group worked on this specific model and its issues to help inform future proposals Group includes: NE States, OES, OPEI and OECA Subgroups formed around specific issues

MA ERP Credit Proposal Credit in the PPA for addressing 600 dry cleaners through ERP: ·  380 tons/yr hazardous waste (environmental footprint ≈ 30 large quantity generators) ·   250 tons/yr hazardous air pollutants ( environmental footprint ≈ 25 major air facilities) Email steven.degabriele@state.ma.us for copy of proposal

Why did MA DEP propose this? Scarce resources must yield greatest environmental benefit MA believes its success on “majors” allows greater opportunities for environmental gains at smaller sources EPA should continue to support innovative programs Greater payoff if meaningful PPA credit from EPA for innovative program results Results-driven decision-making – Trust, but verify

The Essential Elements of an ERP Valid measurement system Self-certification and return to compliance plans Compliance assistance Compliance assurance and enforcement Valid measurement system sufficient to draw conclusions about compliance and environmental performance of the sector as a whole. A valid measurement system is one that produces representative, verifiable, credible and reproducible results. Self-certification by a responsible company official using a set of questions that covers all media included in the ERP and RTC plans submitted where applicable, with a compliance schedule. The self-certification program can be either mandatory or voluntary, but must include a verification component to ensure the veracity of the self-certifications. Compliance assistance sufficient to enable facilities to understand their environmental responsibilities, how to fulfill those responsibilities and complete their self-certifications. Compliance assurance includes a range of activities, including calls, letters, visits and/or inspections. The goal of these activities is to provide confirmation that a facility is in compliance

What is “credit?” Recognition: Official EPA agreement that activities are important parts of state’s overall compliance program in an expanding universe of sectors Offset: Substitute some ERP-like program activities and their results for some amount of core activities and results Key issues: Offsets: How/when to determine? Are results needed first? Adequacy of core program: How will EPA evaluate and apply it to credit?

Describing ERP Projects in PPAs and National Data Systems ERP Matrix will describe program in PPA & on EPA website Includes “environmental footprint,” results, planned & actual activities Place ERP matrix on, or linked to, one or more EPA websites Tracking of ERP activities in EPA systems such as AIRS/AFS or RCRA Info not recommended at this time Key: Data on ERP activities/results widely available to public and regulators 1. Subgroup focused on describing ERP project at first stage of “recognition of value” (recognition credit), not the second stage of “offset credit” 2. Program elements in the matrix are the same categories as in the outline of elements of a full ERP program developed by Subworkgroup 1 3. PPA text would also need to include backup data not in matrix - for example, basis for any calculations of actual and potential emission or hazardous waste generated 4. ERP Matrix entries are specific for a particular fiscal year; including performance targets and measures. 5. Legacy data systems (AFS, RCRAInfo, PCS) differ and different considerations will apply in terms of the type of ERP activities that could be tracked. However, all would require states to enter facility identification data for each of the thousands of small ERP facilities not already in the system. The subgroup agreed that specific aggregate data for each sector (both activities and results) was more important for management purposes than data on specific facilities at this time. 6. State and federal enforcement program managers, other governmental and nongovernmental organizations, and the public would be the audiences for this description. EPA will need to include descriptions and outcomes of ERP projects in the context of base program management.

ERP Model Matrix Example Key Elements Sector Specific Info. Environmental Footprint of Sector # facilities, sector descriptions, environmental concerns, compliance, and environmental comparison with core facilities Valid Measurement System to Support Conclusions about Compliance and Performance Indicators for targeting and measuring performance, processes used; FY planned activities / actual accomplishments, current performance data. Self-Certification, Reporting and Return to Compliance Plans Certification contents, mandatory or optional elements, frequency; FY planned activities / actual accomplishments

ERP Model Matrix Example Key Elements Sector Specific Info. Compliance Assistance to Enable Facilities to Understand Environmental Responsibilities Compliance assistance activities; FY planned activities / actual accomplishments. Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Processes to assure compliance with certification; responses to return to compliance plans; plans for targeted inspections; FY planned activities / actual accomplishments

DATA: What and how much to collect and report to get credit for ERP? Credit continuum: based on program results and amount and specificity of data Concern that bar not be set too high Data depends upon stage of ERP development Key issue: How to credit when data is limited (e.g., where only resource investments and environmental footprints are known)

Proposed Role for Element 13 Work Group in Reviewing State Applications for Credit Proposals submitted by state to region Small group of submitting state, affected Region and OECA make preliminary determination whether to offer credit Determination discussed with Element 13 Work Group Element 13 Work Group then develops general guidance for the state submittal and regional review of similar state proposals for credit

MassDEP ERP Credit Proposal Addendum Completed ERP Matrix for Dry cleaners Environmental Performance Profiles for HW Large Quantity Generators and Air “Majors” Key issues: Regulated group performance vs. agency oversight performance Burden of proof

Next Steps MA to submit proposal addendum with specific data and request for offset credit EPA response to the MA ERP proposal for recognition credit Coordinate with Element 13 Work Group on managing and reviewing proposals Continue offset credit discussion with ERP Credit Work Group (Region, MA, other New England states, OECA & OPEI) Expand ERP credit dialogue beyond New England and engage states on submitting proposals for credit

Discussion Topics for Today Issue #1: What are the barriers preventing other states from seeking credit for their innovative compliance programs? Issue #2: What assistance can EPA provide states in overcoming those barriers?