Model Rule/MOU Update Colleen Delaney, Utah DAQ WESTAR Model Rule Working Group September 18, 2002.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EDDIE TERRILL AIR QUALITY DIVISION DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AUGUST 21, 2014 EPA’s 111(d) Clean Power Plan Rule: A DEQ Perspective.
Advertisements

Facility Lead Corrective Action Approaches Voluntary Agreements RCRA National Meeting August 13, 2003 Jennifer Shoemaker EPA Region 3.
Emissions Trading 101 Corky Martinkovic Arizona Dept. of Environmental Quality Air Quality Division ~ Planning Section WESTAR BART Technical Conference.
Region 9 Tribal Air Quality Conference Regional Haze Rulemakings: Western Regional Air Partnership Annex July 25, 2002.
Department of Transportation Support Services Branch ODOT Procurement Office Intergovernmental Agreements 455 Airport Rd. SE, Bldg K Salem, OR
Self-Governance Negotiations What to expect at the negotiation table 1.
1. Construction/Safety Standards for Small Craft Webinar Presentation January 2014 Transport Canada Associate Assistant Deputy Minister Safety and Security.
1 WRAP Fire Tracking Systems Draft Intent of WRAP FTS Policy – Assist states/tribes to address emissions inventory and tracking associated with fire in.
1 WRAP Policy Fire Tracking Systems Draft December 9, 2002 FEJF Meeting December 10-11, 2002 Jackson, WY.
1 Workshop on the Statement on Implementation and Administration of the TBT Agreement 8 November h00 – 17h00 Stefania Bernabè Trade and Environment.
The Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) WRAP formed in 1997 as the successor organization to Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission (GCVTC) –
SIP Development and Implementation in New Mexico - and Why it Matters to Tribes Rita Bates Planning Section Chief Air Quality Bureau New Mexico Environment.
MS4 Remand Rule Intergovernmental Associations Briefing September 15, 2015.
ALTERNATIVES TO BART -TRADING- Lily Wong USEPA – Region 9 September 1, 2005.
Leading the Public Service to Higher Productivity Service Charter Briefing to the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration 11 September.
SAFETEA-LU Section 6002 “ Efficient Environmental Reviews for Project Decisionmaking”
1 Update on the STIP-II Project & Draft Model SIP Brian Finneran Oregon Department of Environmental Quality WRAP Meeting Portland, OR April 3, 2003.
Distinguishing: Clean Air Act, EPA Rules, Regulations and Guidance David Cole U.S. EPA, OAQPS Research Triangle Park, NC.
Stationary Sources Joint Forum Update Eric Massey Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Lee Alter and Patrick Cummins Western Governors’ Association.
Programmatic Regulations PDT Workshop COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN April 18, 2002.
Restoring VA Waters the TMDL Way Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Regional Administrator U.S. EPA Region 3.
COMPLYING WITH THE UN CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.
SIP Improvement: Current initiatives Anna Marie Wood Director Air Quality Policy Division Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards U.S. EPA WESTAR.
EPA Chesapeake Bay Trading and Offsets Workplan June 1, 2012.
1 Fire Emissions Joint Forum: Section 309 Requirements Continued… -Enhanced Smoke Management Programs -Annual Emission Goals for Fire -Fire Tracking Systems.
Final Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule Briefing for NTAA EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards April 17, 2007.
Technical Coordinator Report Fall Technical Conference Dust Research RA BART Backstop Trading Program WESTAR Committee Meeting.
Revisions to Primacy State Underground Injection Control Programs Primacy State Implementation of the New Class V Rule.
Reliable Power Reliable Markets Reliable People Transition of Authoritative Documents – Information Session September 2009 Doyle Sullivan Evelyn Kelly.
Market Trading Forum Update Ira Domsky and Colleen Delaney, Co-chairs.
Update on the STIP-II Project: Draft Model SIP Brian Finneran Oregon Department of Environmental Quality WRAP Air Manager’s Committee Santa Fe, NM March.
1 Status of Ongoing Rulemakings and Safety Culture Update Deborah Jackson, Deputy Director Division of Intergovernmental Liaison and Rulemaking OAS Annual.
Air Quality Policy Division D P A Q 1 Regional Haze Update WESTAR September 17-19, 2007 EPA Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards.
FINAL CLEAN POWER PLAN Before the Virginia Energy Efficiency Council Virginia Department of Environmental Quality November 12, 2015.
WRAP 2003 Work Plan: Overview and IOC Elements WRAP 2003 Work Plan: Overview and IOC Elements WRAP Board Meeting November 12, 2003 Tempe, AZ Rick Sprott.
Alternatives to BART Rule Discussion with WRAP Nov , 2006.
TRIBAL DECISION ON IMPLEMENTATION TAS/DELEGATION/TIP TIP/TAS Training December 3, 2012.
Western Emissions Budget (WEB) Trading Program: Model Rule, Model SIP/TIP, MOU Bob Lebens, WESTAR Council Air Managers Committee March 19, 2003.
WRAP 2002 WORK PLAN Overview and Financial Status Report WRAP Board Meeting November 14, 2001 Salt Lake City, Utah.
Clean Air Act Section 111 WESTAR Meeting Presented by Lisa Conner U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation November 6, 2013.
Funding of Regional Planning Organizations May, 2006.
Strategic Plan Development Status Technical Analysis Forum meeting October 11, 2007.
North West Region Gas Regional Initiatives Regulatory Co-ordination Workshop 23 rd April 2007.
Work Items for §309 SIPs WESTAR Fall Technical Conference September 19, 2002 Tom Moore & Brian Finneran.
308 Outline (a) Purpose (b) When are 1st plans due (c) Options for regional planning (d) Core requirements (e) BART requirements (f) Comprehensive periodic.
WRAP Overview Established in 1997 as successor to Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission. Develop technical and policy tools needed by western states.
Update on the WRAP STIP-2 Project Brian Finneran Oregon Department of Environmental Quality WRAP Board Meeting, Tempe AZ November 13, 2002.
WRAP WORK PLAN UPDATE NOVEMBER 2001 Submitted to WRAP Board for Approval Andy Ginsburg ODEQ, Co-Chair IOC Forum Mike George ADEQ, Co-Chair TOC Forum.
DEMUTUALIZATION OF THE NAIROBI STOCK EXCHANGE LEGAL FRAMEWORK A presentation made at the Demutualization Stakeholders workshop on November 24, 2009 By.
Proposed Rulemaking: Additional RACT Requirements for Major Sources of NO x and VOCs (25 Pa. Code Chapters 121 and 129) Environmental Quality Board November.
The American Experience in Regulatory Review and Reform Dominic J. Mancini, PhD. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs U.S. Office of Management.
Incorporating Smoke Management Plans into Regional Haze SIPs (Arizona Perspective) Smoke Management Planning Workshop WRAP 308 Planning Committee & Fire.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
WRAP Update Patrick Cummins WESTAR Meeting September 23, 2005
Preparing for Permit Review
Tribal/State Agreements Under ICWA
Creating a P.L Plan.
CAIR Replacement Rule and Regional Haze
Technical Coordinator Report
Visibility Coordinator’s Report
Status of U.S.-EU Bilateral Agreement
What is OAL? The Office of Administrative Law (OAL) ensures that agency regulations are clear, necessary, legally valid, and available to the public. OAL.
EPA Clarification on Regional Haze SIP Issues
Market Trading Forum Update
308 VS. 309 DECISION PROCESS November 2001 WRAP Meeting
Regional Haze SIP Status Report
Workshop Technical and Policy Studies to Support the Annex
Uinta Basin General Conformity
Market Trading Forum Update
Regional Haze Regulatory Developments
Presentation transcript:

Model Rule/MOU Update Colleen Delaney, Utah DAQ WESTAR Model Rule Working Group September 18, 2002

Backstop Trading Program Model Rule/MOU Update Needed to: Ensure Model Rule/MOU contain all necessary provisions –Incorporate ‘Supplement to the Annex’ –Incorporate EPA comments –Identify any unresolved policy issues Ensure consistency with state and tribal regulatory structures

Progress to Date: Assemble Working Group Refine Work Plan Review Model Rule/MOU in detail Review other Trading Programs (OTC, NOx SIP call, Acid Rain) Begin Model Rule/MOU revision

Working Group Corky Martinkovic, AZ Rita Trujillo, NM Colleen Delaney, Lenore Epstein, UT Tina Jenkins, WY Bob Gruenig, NTEC Amy Mignella, White Mountain Apache Tribe Lee Alter, WRAP Lily Wong, EPA Region 9 Laurel Dygowski, EPA Region 8 Kristin Gaston, Bob Lebens, WESTAR

Work to be done: Finish revisions to Model Rule, SIP/TIP Template and MOU Provide Working Draft for AMC/MTF Review Hold Workshop to educate broader audience

Model Rule Challenges Independent jurisdictions trying to establish a regional program – no regional authority Need to agree upon common elements of the program Uncertainty about participation Timing (submittals, and EPA approval)

First Issue: Enforceability U.S. Constitution Art I, § 10, cl. 3 “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State…” Clean Air Act § 102(c) “No such agreement or compact shall be binding or obligatory upon any State a party thereto unless and until it has been approved by Congress”  Based on these constraints, an MOU would not be enforceable without Congressional approval

Enforceability Resolution It is not necessary for the MOU to be enforceable, because the rule and the SIP become the enforceable mechanism. The SIP/TIP/FIP will ensure that the states and tribes meet their commitments, and The Rule will ensure that the sources and market traders meet their commitments

How Will Enforceability Issue Affect Program? Need more clarification of how enforcement will work –EPA oversight –Citizen suit provisions (does not apply to tribes) –How would this work for tribes? Plan must be federally-approved to become enforceable Timing of EPA approval of SIPs must be coordinated

MOU Still Needed? The MOU is a demonstration of good faith by the states and tribes that sign the agreement –It provides additional support to show EPA that the states and tribes have worked together in the development of this program and, therefore, it is more likely to be successful on a regional level

MOU Still Needed? Outline common understandings, schedules Possibly use to establish intent to pursue 309 option –May create difficulties because rulemaking process may be used to make decision –Timing? Ceremony of signing MOU may be important

Division into SIP and Rule All elements of the program must be enforceable States cannot regulate themselves –Rule establishes requirements for sources, state enforceable –SIP text outlines state’s commitment Rule and SIP text become federally enforceable

Division into SIP and Rule Recommendation –Split model rule into two parts: Rule language that would apply to sources SIP language that would apply to states and would also establish the commitment to develop regional inventories and to accept information from other states –Write rule and SIP text so that they apply to an individual state or tribe

Examples of Regional Issues addressed in Model Rule Compliance with Milestone –Common and consistent process for making decision about program trigger –Public comment –Official determination Each state and tribe must make the decision in their jurisdiction – no regional authority

Examples of Regional Issues addressed in Model Rule SIP Revisions –EPA routinely requires SIP revisions for program changes Need to assure that integrity and goals of program not affected –Timing issues for regional programs Multiple states and tribes may need to make the same change Regional process required

Examples of Regional Issues addressed in Model Rule SIP Revisions (cont) –Model Rule/SIP establishes an interim adjustment process In cooperation with EPA Public comment Rely on 5-year SIP reviews to incorporate changes into SIP –Regional recommendation needed 1½ to 2 years before SIP revision due

Examples of Regional Issues addressed in Model Rule Tracking System Administrator –Has no authority –States and Tribes are responsible to ensure that these functions are accomplished –Contract could outline duties –Rule rewritten to limit the role of the tracking system administrator

Examples of Regional Issues addressed in Model Rule Allowance Transfers –State and tribal rules establish what sources within their jurisdiction may do –No authority over account holders in other jurisdictions Allowances only have value if they can be used by a source so economics will require sellers to abide by the rules that buyers require –Existing contract law important