Building Stronger State and
Local Partnerships
2007 Annual Report
Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
-------
Message From The Deputy Associate Administrator i
Mission Statement iii
Organization iii
State and Local Team iii
National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS) Team iii
A Review Of OIR's 2007 Accomplishments 1
Outreach Tours 1
National Association Outreach Meetings 1
2007 Speakers 1
Communication Tools 1
Correspondence And Communication Of EPA Initiatives 3
EPA's Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) 5
Building Stronger Partnerships At The Local Level 5
LGAC Produces Sustainable Water Infrastructure Video 5
LGAC Looks To Produce A New Video On Recycling 6
Aiding EPA's Efforts To Improve Environmental Indicators 6
Recommendations For Improving Environmental Protection At The Local Level 6
Water Infrastructure 6
Recycling 7
Reducing Diesel Fleet Emissions 7
Improving Environmental Protection In Small Communities 8
Partnering With The Environmental Council Of The States (ECOS) 10
State Partnership Initiatives 10
Adding The State Perspective To EPA's Budget Process 10
-------
Contents (continued)
Identifying And Reducing Waste In Processes And Reporting Requirements 10
Improving The Estimates Of The Costs Of Rules 1 1
Ensuring Consistent And Meaningful Oversight Of State Programs 1 1
Tackling Complex Environmental Issues 12
Mercury in the Environment 1 2
National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS) 13
Performance Partnership Agreements 1 3
Performance Partnership Grants 1 3
Max!mizing PPGs Initiafive 14
Partnering To Show Results From State Grant Agreements 14
EPA-State Collaboration To Reduce State Reporting Burden 15
Taking Environmental Protection To The Next Level—The 2007 NAPA Report 16
Closing Remarks 18
Looking Forward 19
Office Of Intergovernmental Relations Contact Information 20
Appendix 21
Outreach Meetings 21
Governors 21
Mayors 2 1
Council Members 22
Local Government Representatives 23
-------
Message From the Deputy
Associate Administrator
As I celebrate the completion of my first year as
Deputy Associate Administrator for the U.S. En-
vironmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Office of
Intergovernmental Relations (OIR), I am pleased
to provide a summary of our 2007 activities and
accomplishments.
When I was appointed to this position, Adminis-
trator Johnson stressed to me his desire for OIR
to strengthen EPA's relationship with its state and
local partners. As a former mayor and elected state
official, I know firsthand the importance of strong
federal partnerships in protecting the environment
and public health of our citizens. As co-regulators,
state and local governments are on the front lines of
delivering the environmental improvements envi-
sioned in the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and
the Safe Drinking Water Act, among others.
My goal is to sig-
nificantly increase
interaction with
state and local
elected officials,
which we have
been accomplish-
ing by enhancing
outreach activities,
attending confer-
ences, and hosting
meetings with state
and local officials when they visit Washington,
DC. This interaction has enabled me to see directly
how well local governments are progressing in
cleaning up the environment and conserving natu-
ral resources.
I am proud of the Local Government Advisory
Committee's (LGAC) record in providing timely
and experienced advice to Administrator John-
son. One of the LGAC's greatest accomplishments
in 2007 was
developing a
video high-
lighting the
efforts of small
communities
to address their
water infrastruc-
ture problems.
This video, titled,
Water Infrastructure—Successful Strategies for Lo-
cal Leadership, was awarded the prestigious Telly
Award, which honors outstanding local, regional,
and cable TV commercials and programs. I invite
you to read more about the work LGAC accom-
plished in 2007 later in this report, and to watch
the video, which is available on EPA's Web site at:
www.epa.gov/waterinfrastructure/lgac_video/
index. html#video.
I am especially pleased about our work with the
Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), be-
cause a sound working relationship with the states
is fundamental to environmental and public health
protection. ECOS is the national, nonprofit, nonpar-
tisan association of state and territorial environmen-
tal commissioners, who are directly responsible for
EPA programs delegated to the states. EPA's access
to the knowledge, experience, and insight of the
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
individuals who manage state programs enhances
OIR's ability to better advise EPA's leadership about
the status of environmental progress nationwide.
Few others are better able to advise EPA.
One of our most important endeavors in 2007
was continuing the development of the National
Environmental Performance Partnership System
(NEPPS), which is designed to enhance the
effectiveness of EPA-state partnerships. After a
decade of ongoing reforms, EPA and states now
set goals and priorities together. Flexible funding
provided through Performance Partnership Grants
(PPGs) helps to focus resources on states' most
pressing needs, and improved performance mea-
sures better gauge progress in meeting environ-
mental goals. Building on this foundation, we are
making continuous improvements as we work with
states on such challenges as reducing reporting
burden, streamlining administrative processes, and
applying the concepts of performance partnerships
to collaborative efforts with other agencies.
Many exciting things are being done at the state
and local level, and we continue to look for new
ways to strengthen relationships with our partners
to provide even better service. It has been very
rewarding to see these "laboratories of innovation"
develop ways that improve our environment and
protect public health.
Finally, OIR's accomplishments would not be pos-
sible without the support, advice, and counsel of
the professional staff in this office and in EPA's
regional offices. OIR and regional staffs' knowledge
of state and local issues and their ability to commu-
nicate this important information to EPA benefits
the Agency and the federal government as a whole.
Mayor Randy C. Kelly
Deputy Associate Administrator
Office of Intergovernmental Relations
Message From the Associate Deputy Administrator
-------
Mission Statement
The mission of the Office of Intergovernmental Relations (OIR) is to foster and promote partnerships
between EPA and state and local governments that are essential to achieving environmental results. OIR
serves as the Agency's vital link to state and local elected and appointed officials and acts as a resource for
expertise and information to the Agency and our stakeholders in facilitating solutions to intergovernmental
issues. These solutions help produce better environmental and program outcomes.
Organization
State and Local Team
Manages intergovernmental relations for the
Administrator and the entire Agency.
Works with regions to build an effective Agency
intergovernmental network.
Monitors issues that impact associations and
individual state and local governments.
• Ensures that EPA leaders understand the issues
of governors, state legislators, state commission-
ers, mayors, county commissioners, and other
state and local officials.
• Communicates the Agency's priorities, policies,
and activities to these constituents.
• Provides prompt response and attention to the
environmental and Agency policy concerns of
state and local government officials.
• Manages standing federal advisory committees
of local officials—the Local Government Adviso-
ry Committee (LGAC) and the Small Community
Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS).
Ensures that Agency policies consider specific im-
pacts on state and local governments and general
federalism issues, including through participation
on the Agency's Regulatory Steering Committee.
• Monitors and coordinates EPA review and tech-
nical assistance on state legislation, association
resolutions, and state executive policies.
• Tracks and coordinates Agency correspondence
with governors and other officials.
• Manages grants to various intergovernmental
organizations, such as the Environmental Council
of the States (ECOS) and the National Association
of Development Organizations (NADO).
National Environmental Performance
Partnership System (NEPPS) Team
Oversees implementation of NEPPS, including
Performance Partnership Agreements (PPAs) and
Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs).
Provides expertise to the Agency on EPA-state
relations, strategic planning, and the goals and
tools of performance partnerships, and promotes
policies and actions to achieve more effective
EPA-state partnerships.
Serves in a leadership capacity on EPA-state
and internal EPA work groups addressing issues
such as state grants, reporting requirements, and
innovations.
Develops white papers, policy memoranda,
guidance, training, and implementation tools on
performance partnerships and other EPA-state
topics.
Manages data gathering, research, and analyti-
cal projects or studies on topics such as perfor-
mance partnerships, state reporting, and issues
affecting EPA-state relations.
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
A Review of OIR's 2007
Accomplishments
Outreach Tours
Throughout 2007, OIR took significant steps to
improve our outreach efforts with state and local
officials. We attended 26 national and regional
conferences, traveled to 25 cities, toured 14 local
communities, and visited every EPA region. We
interacted and worked with numerous governors,
mayors, county commissioners, state legislators,
city council members, town officials, and envi-
ronmental commissioners, and worked closely
with national state and local associations, hold-
ing regular outreach meetings.
National Association Outreach
Meetings
In an effort to continue building partnerships
through increased dialogue, OIR hosted quarterly
national association outreach meetings to provide
a forum for senior EPA managers to brief repre-
sentatives from state and local associations on
timely, high profile issues. In turn, these rep-
resentatives were presented a forum to present
issues they had heard from their constituents.
2007 Speakers
• Jon Scholl, Senior Advisor to the Administra-
tor on agriculture issues, along with represen-
tatives from the Department of Agriculture,
gave a detailed presentation on the conserva-
tion and environmental issues included in the
2007 Farm Bill.
* Bob Meyers, Acting Assistant Administrator
for the Office of Air and Radiation (OAR), gave
a presentation on EPA's initiatives to control
greenhouse gases. This was followed by at-
torneys from the Office of General Counsel,
•NAMl
1
who discussed the Agency's perspective on the
Supreme Court case allowing EPA regulation of
greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
• Granta Nakayama, Assistant Administrator
for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA), gave a broad presentation
that included his comments about the recent
EPA/Department of Justice (DOJ) $4.6 billion
settlement with American Electric Power; he
followed with a discussion of the year's en-
forcement statistics and OECA's structure for
implementing its enforcement and compliance
responsibilities.
Communication Tools
Throughout 2007, OIR staff shared noteworthy
accomplishments and forthcoming events in the
State and Local Weekly Report, the NEPPS Weekly
Report, and the Intergovernmental Relations
Quarterly Newsletter. These three publications are
essential tools OIR staff uses to improve
A Review of OIR's 2007 Accomplishments
-------
communication and outreach efforts to
EPA employees and stakeholders. The
information in these reports provides
insight on the
level and quality
of service OIR ex-
tends to those as-
sociated with the
work and mission
of EPA. In addi-
tion, these reports
provide OIR staff
an outlet to share
its work product
and insightful
information
within their
areas of ex-
pertise. Most
importantly,
these publica-
tions provide
a forum for
staff to inform
others of sig-
nificant and exciting events occurring
throughout the states and local com-
munities in the United States.
• SVJSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS'
State and Local Best Practices: Public-Private Partnerships to Fund Energ'
Efficiency Upgrades in Quincy, Massachusetts
In May 2007, former Quincy, Massachusetts, Mayor
William Phelan signed a $32.8 million agreement
with Honeywell International Inc. for a program
to reduce energy usage and water consumption in the
city's schools and municipal buildings.
This program includes upgrading more than 19,000
lighting fixtures with environmentally friendly
lamps; installing energy-efficient boilers in six
schools and three city buildings; replacing old,
inefficient mechanical systems throughout the city;
upgrading control systems; implementing a citywide
Energy Management System; and installing solar
technologies, energy-efficient windows and doors,
water saving bathroom fixtures, and new water
meters for all major water consumers.
The city of Quincy is the first municipality in the com-
monwealth to utilize a new Energy Conservation Law,
M.G.L. c. 25A §111 (Chapter 11 of the Acts of 2006).
This statute allows the city to enter into a 20-year guar-
anteed energy and water savings contract.
Quincy's program will reduce the electricity consump-
tion of the buildings involved in the program by 25
percent, fuel usage by
27 percent, and water
usage by approximately
35 percent. The cost sav-
ings resulting from these
cuts, along with the
additional revenue that
will be received from the
new water meters, will
fund the improvements.
Quincy is also partner-
ing with Honeywell and
EPA to provide energy
benchmarking for all of
its facilities. This will
provide the city with a
performance rating for
each of its buildings and allow Quincy to enhance
the energy efficiency of each building. Quincy will
also apply for ENERGY STAR status for some of its
facilities. The ENERGY STAR Challenge calls on
school districts and other organizations nationwide
to improve efficiency by 10 percent or more.
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
Correspondence and
Communication of EPA
Initiatives
During 2007, OIR coordinated timely
responses to more than 100 letters
from governors and state and local
leaders to Administrator Johnson on
several EPA issues. The most fre-
quent letter topic was the proposed
changes to the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Ozone, followed
by the California Greenhouse Gas
Waiver, the Mercury Rule, State Imple-
mentation Plan Approvals, National
Rural Water Funding, U.S./Mexico
Border Funding, Chesapeake Bay Res-
toration, Superfund Sites, Brownfield
Grants, and National Pollution Dis-
charge Elimination Systems (NPDES)
Permits. OIR also forwarded studies and
Agency initiatives, such as the NAPA
study and Burden Reduction Initiative,
to state and local officials. Finally, OIR
ensured that our stakeholders received
timely and informative notification of
breaking EPA news and important initia-
tives through our extensive network of
regional, state, and local contacts.
ocal Best Practices: Fayetteville, Arkansas, Hires a Sustain-
ability Coordinator and Saves City $273,000 in First Year
In January 2007, Fayetteville Mayor Dan Coody
continued turning this small northwestern Arkan-
sas city into a center of the sustainability move-
ment by hiring John Coleman as the first sustainabili-
ty coordinator in the state of Arkansas. In developing
and implementing a sustainability plan for the city,
Mr. Coleman works with city officials to creatively
incorporate best practices and policies into viable pro-
grams, reducing the city's consumption of electricity
and other utilities, and effectively earning his salary
through the cost savings resulting from this increased
energy efficiency. In the position's
inaugural year, Fayetteville expects to
save $273,000, lowering its bills from
$2 million to about $1.7 million.
Other measures spearheaded in 2007 by Mr. Cole-
man to increase energy efficiency throughout city
government included: partnering with Johnson
Controls, Inc. to perform energy audits on major
government buildings; partnering with the city
council to adopt a green building policy requiring
all new, city-owned buildings to be Leadership in
Environmental Design (LEED)® Silver certified;
and developing a green purchasing policy and a
fuel conservation policy.
City of Fayetteville - Annual Utility Cost
One of Mr. Coleman's first accom-
plishments was calculating the city
government's greenhouse gas emis-
sions baseline for 2006. That base-
line will be used to gauge future
reductions, with a goal of reduc-
ing emissions 20 percent by 2010.
These reductions will be achieved
through city staff education and
making use of existing technology.
$2,200,000
$2,000,000
$1,800,000
$1,600,000
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$600,000
$400,000
$273,210
Status Quo
Actual
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
A Review of OIR's 2007 Accomplishments
-------
State and Local Best Practices: Building and Sustaining a Diverse
Network of Environmentally Educated Leaders in Georgia
The Institute for Georgia Environmental Leader-
ship (IGEL) is a leadership program dedicated
to building and sustaining a diverse network of
environmentally educated leaders who will help
resolve Georgia's environmental challenges. It
brings together a diverse group of leaders from a
multitude of backgrounds who are committed to
confronting environmental issues and are posi-
tioned to make meaningful contributions to the
environment. Participants' backgrounds include
agriculture, business, civic groups, concerned
citizens, educational institutions, environmental
organizations, forestry, governments, industries,
and neighborhood groups,
The program is facilitated by faculty at the Fan-
ning Institute at the University of Georgia. While
it does not attempt to create a consensus of opin-
ion or promote a specific issue, participants are
better prepared to take action and make a differ-
ence in the lives of others.
Through a multisession program that takes place
between May and November in various locations
around the state, participants are exposed to the
pressing environmental concerns in all regions of
Georgia. The program
emphasizes hands-on
learning techniques
and opportunities
to master new skills
through practice. Ses-
sions include leader-
ship development on
current environmental
issues, emerging envi-
ronmental challenges,
environmental problem 1
solving, communica-
tion skills, and conflict
management.
Going into its seventh
year, IGEL has built a network of 188 program
alumni. At the last graduation in November 2007,
Ben Grumbles, Assistant Administrator for EPA's
Office of Water, gave the commencement address
and discussed how EPA's WaterSense program
coupled with water conservation efforts can help
Georgia alleviate some of its water shortages.
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
EPA's Local Government
Advisory Committee (LGAC)
Building Stronger Partnerships at the
Local Level
Chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) and consisting of current and former
elected officials, LGAC provides advice and rec-
ommendations to EPA senior officials on a broad
range of topics in an effort to assist EPA's devel-
opment of stronger partnerships with state and
local governments.
The following are broad accomplishments of
LGAC throughout 2007:
Held three full committee meetings (published
in the Federal Register).
* Increased and diversified committee
membership.
* Expanded focus areas to include watersheds,
coastlines, and the military.
Advised EPA on more than 50 local environ-
mental policies.
• Conducted more than 30 conference calls.
• Completed fact-finding and site visits to small
communities in Idaho to better understand
environmental issues specific to their size.
LGAC Produces Sustainable Water
Infrastructure Video
One of the most notable accomplishments of
LGAC in 2007 was the release of the video,
"Water Infrastructure: Successful Strategies for
Local Leadership." The video features five locally
elected officials explaining how they successfully
met their communities' needs for sustainable
water infrastructure, in an effort to educate other
communities and elected officials.
In sharing their experiences, these five local of-
ficials convey the importance of managing water
infrastructure and assets; demonstrate success-
ful examples of how they met their communi-
ties' expectations for clean and safe water, and
demonstrate to other local officials facing similar
problems how to meet the needs of their com-
munities. The video has been distributed to more
than 2,500 interested
parties and has been
featured at many na-
tional conferences. It
was recently awarded
the prestigious Telly
Award, which hon-
ors outstanding local,
regional, and cable
TV commercials and
programs. The video is
available for viewing
online at: www.epa.gov/
waterinfrastructure/
lgac_video/index.
html#video.
EPA's Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC)
-------
LGAC Looks to Produce a New
Video on Recycling
Hoping to build on the success of the
water infrastructure video, EPA's Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
(OSWER) has turned to LGAC to devel-
op a new video highlighting local recy-
cling "best practices." This video will
demonstrate to other communities how
they can improve their recycling pro-
grams. LGAC is currently studying local
recycling programs, as well as how to
best produce a video that increases out-
reach efforts and serves as a resource
for educating local communities.
Aiding EPA's Efforts to
Improve Environmental
Indicators
The 2007 Report on the Environment:
Science Report presented a set of
indicators to assist EPA in answering
questions regarding the state of the
environment, and to facilitate EPA's mis-
sion. LGAC was requested to review and
comment on the indicators from a local
government perspective and also asked
how to encourage utilization of the re-
port at local and community levels.
After reviewing the report, LGAC offered
several conclusions and recommenda-
tions to EPA, including:
Stress the importance of environmen-
tal indicators at the local level.
• Expand groundwater indicators to
include the nature, extent, and
distribution of groundwater.
• Fill in the gaps of indicators for a
more comprehensive analysis of the
cost of action or inaction.
• Develop a scorecard that is more
transparent to the public.
• Develop ocean indicators.
• The report is available online at:
http://cfpub.epa.gov/eroe/.
Recommendations for
Improving Environmental
Protection at the Local Level
Water Infrastructure
LGAC recommended that, in order to
promote sustainable water infrastructure,
EPA should do the following:
* Use social marketing outreach to local
governments emphasizing the urgency
and critical need for managing water
infrastructure.
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
• Foster local and regional strategic
planning processes.
• Shift the message of sustainable
infrastructure from the paradigm
of cost to investment.
• Distribute the sustainable water
infrastructure video to state environ-
mental commissioners and directors.
Recycling
To improve recycling rates in small
communities, LGAC recommended
that EPA do the following:
Encourage use of OSWER's recycling
toolkit and calculator to aid and en-
hance recycling at the local level, and
disseminate these tools widely.
• Ensure that the current recycling tool-
kit provides additional information
for local governments and more case
studies of effective programs, espe-
cially among small communities.
• Focus outreach efforts and programs
on small, disadvantaged, and tribal
government communities.
• Highlight the economic impacts of recy-
cling in marketing outreach products.
Reducing Diesel Fleet Emissions
In reviewing the Clean Air Act Advi-
sory Committee's recommendations to
reduce diesel emissions, LGAC recom-
mended that EPA do the following:
• Encourage retrofits for current diesel
engines because they are the best avail-
able technology.
• Implement public education efforts to
inform stakeholders of the value of air
EPA's Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC)
-------
quality benefits, grant programs, and
reducing emissions.
• Clarify tax code in grant funding so that
companies are not discouraged from
seeking grants due to tax implications.
* Reduce administrative burdens of
grants.
* Ensure that grant periods are long
enough to allow the market to take
advantage of the opportunities.
* Ensure that incentive grants are
geographically diverse.
Improving Environmental
Protection in Small
Communities
A subcommittee of LGAC, the Small
Community Advisory Subcommittee
(SCAS), was very active in FY 2007.
SCAS advises EPA on ways to as-
sist small communities, defined as
those with less than 2,500 residents,
in complying with environmental
regulations. Approximately 26,000
small town governments in this coun-
try deal with the same environmental
problems and regulations as larger cit-
With Big Environmental Problems
In 2007, SCAS sponsored a trip for EPA officials to
two small Idaho communities, Dietrich and Castl-
eford, and one larger city, Twin Falls, to highlight
the difficulties small communities face and contrast
them with those of a larger community.
City of Dietrich, Idaho
Environmental Problem: Funding Water
Infrastructure Projects
The city of Dietrich, incorporated in 1909, has a
population of 215 and is located on the south slope
of a sagebrush-covered, extinct volcano called Crater
Butte in rural Lincoln County, Idaho, about 225
miles northeast of Twin Falls. The leading em-
ployer of the town is the school district, and many
residents commute out of town for work. Dietrich
installed a community drinking water system in
1992 and recently completed a lagoon system for
its wastewater treatment. The town has functioned
as its own contractor, using volunteers and its own
equipment to do much of the work, including de-
molition. Mayor Jeanette Knowles is in her late 80s
and is afraid she will not see the completion of the
work she started with help and technical assistance
from her community.
City of Castleford, Idaho
Environmental Problem: Meeting the Arsenic
Rule Standards
The city of Castleford
is a rural community
in Twin Falls County,
Idaho, with a population
of 277. The city water
system serves 118 cus-
tomers, including two
churches, one school,
12 businesses, and 103
residents. For many,
community water is
probably the most
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
ies, yet lack the manpower, expertise,
and funds to handle these issues.
SCAS is developing a disaster assis-
tance pamphlet to help equip small
communities with the knowledge
and tools necessary to prepare for
disasters, request federal aid quickly
when disasters occur, and implement
recovery when disasters occur. SCAS
is also in the process of compiling
a compendium of state assistance
grants for small communities and
determining the most appropriate way
for it to be distributed.
Communities With Big Environmental Problems (continued)
essential public infra-
structure component.
Standards imposed by
federal regulations can
be especially burden-
some for small com-
munities such as Castl-
eford, which is having
a difficult time with the
^W implementation of the
Arsenic Rule. Castl-
eford had to relocate its
municipal well due to
arsenic contamination.
This relocation created
a fiscal chain reaction,
including possibly hav-
ing to move city hall to
comply with regulations. Mayor Rita Ruffing is also
the city's water system operator.
City of Twin Falls, Idaho
Environmental Problem: Maintaining City
Water Systems' Current Standards
The city of Twin Falls has a population of 31,989 and
is the fifth largest city in the state. Agriculture, food
processing, and retail businesses are the major con-
tributors to the economy. Mayor Lance W. Clow gave
SCAS overviews of the city's public water system and
financial situation. Mr. Gregory T. Misbach, P.E, DEQ,
Regional Technical Engineer for the city, indicated that
the water system meets all the current standards and
is expected to remain in compliance with public water
system requirements in the following areas: water
treatment, water source development and protection,
and water distribution system integrity.
EPA's Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC)
-------
Partnering with the
Environmental Council
of the States (ECOS)
State Partnership Initiatives
Timely, meaningful, and appropriate consultation
with the states as co-regulators is central to the
EPA-state relationship and effective implementa-
tion of programs delegated to the states under
federal environmental statutes. In addition to
improving consultation, we are working together
with states in different ways to solve challenging
problems. The practical knowledge, experience,
and insight of the individuals who manage state
programs are recognized as vast resources for
partnerships and collaboration, which changes the
nature of the dialogue between EPA and the states.
Adding the State Perspective to EPA's
Budget Process
EPAs budget proposals have traditionally been
developed through an internal process with
limited opportunity for state input. Under the
leadership of EPA Chief Financial Officer Lyons
Gray, the Agency's new budget process invites
"I've been attending ECOS meetings for two
years now and it seems to me... there is less
grousing and more listening by everyone
involved... so much of what we get done at
EPA depends on relationships, and rela-
tionships depend on people listening closely
to each other, not just complaining about
what's wrong...but, in the end, people,
working together, make things happen."
EPA Deputy Administrator Marcus Peacock, reflect-
ing on the increase in collaboration and partner-
ship with the states as witnessed at the 2007 ECOS
Annual Meeting in Sun Valley, Idaho.
the states, through ECOS, to submit budget pro-
posals and participate in budget hearings with
the Agency's senior managers. Written materials
prepared by ECOS are provided to the Agency's
national program managers in advance to inform
the development of their budget proposals. After
the initial hearing, the ECOS ombudsperson from
OCIR participates in the budget discussions to
ask and answer questions about state funding
needs and priorities. ECOS has now participated
in the development of the FY 2008 and FY 2009
budget proposals.
Identifying and Reducing Waste in
Processes and Reporting Requirements
In addition to the Agencywide effort with the
states to identify and eliminate unnecessary
reporting requirements—the Burden Reduction
Initiative—an OCIR grant sustains organizational
change projects in the states following successful
innovation pilots in Delaware, Iowa, Nebraska,
Michigan, and Minnesota. With funds provided
by EPA programs, ECOS will continue to provide
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
iron me
iolation
resource information, training, facilita-
tion, and funding for organizational
change projects in the states. All
levels of government are currently
embracing organizational change
techniques, such as "Kaizen" and
"LEAN," developed and used in the
manufacturing and private sectors to
improve processes and reduce waste.
A recent EPA Region 7 Kaizen project
with the states of Iowa, Kansas, Mis-
souri, and Nebraska received an inno-
vation award from EGOS' membership
and is now recognized as a national
best management practice. Other states
are using LEAN or similar organiza-
tional change techniques with EGOS'
assistance, funded in part by EPA.
"Our experience with the LEAN
process has been terrific. Given
its success, I expect to see other
departments queuing up for more
participation. The neat thing from
Tennessee's perspective is that our
introduction and use of the LEAN
process was derived totally from
ECOS."
Paul Sloan
Deputy Commissioner
Tennessee Department of Environment
and Conservation
Improving the Estimates of the
Costs of Rules
In late 2004, ECOS published a study on
the amount of funding needed to imple-
ment federally mandated environmental
regulations. The principal reason for
the "at least $1 billion national annual
shortfall" reported in the study was the
confluence of the growing fiscal crisis
faced by states, coupled with the
increase in "unfunded" federal man-
dates. As federal funding for grants to
the states for delegated programs con-
tinued to decline, ECOS and EPA's Na-
tional Center of Environmental Econom-
ics (NCEE) performed a series of case
studies to determine the nature and
extent of demands placed on states as a
result of EPA regulations. ECOS and six
states participated in a detailed study of
four major regulations. A comparison
of the data gathered with EPA's own
cost data suggests that EPA can improve
how it estimates state implementation
costs for environmental regulations. In
2008, ECOS, EPA, and four of the origi-
nal six states will participate in Phase II
of the project, which is designed to bet-
ter understand state startup costs and
state recurring activities and associated
costs; examine ways to reduce adminis-
trative burden; and increase rule flexi-
bility. Ultimately, the project will inform
revisions to the Agency's guidance for
estimating the cost of rules.
Ensuring Consistent and
Meaningful Oversight of State
Programs
In 2005, EPA's Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance (OECA)
and the ECOS Compliance Committee
developed and piloted the State Review
Framework (SRF) as a tool to provide
consistent national oversight of the
enforcement of programs delegated to
the states. The SRF provides a standard
set of review elements and metrics
establishing a national baseline for
enforcement and compliance activities
in three major environmental programs:
stationery sources under the Clean Air
Act, permitted facilities under the Clean
Water Act, and permitted waste facili-
ties under the Resources Conservation
and Recovery Act. In 2007, EPA and the
states completed SRF reviews in all 50
Partnering with the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS)
-------
states and initiated a joint evaluation of
the SRF, including the process, the met-
rics, its overall effectiveness in meeting
the original objectives, and how to best
improve it for the next round of pro-
gram reviews. The joint evaluation is al-
ready underway and will be completed
by April 2008.
A July 2007 report of the U.S. Gov-
ernment Accountability Office (GAO)
concluded that the SRF provides the
means to ensure consistent and effec-
tive enforcement among the states, but
acknowledged that corrective actions
identified will not be feasible because
the states lack sufficient funding, staff
levels, expertise, and other resources
that are vital to carrying out their en-
forcement responsibilities. The report
notes that overall funding for the same
core programs increased from 1997 to
2006, but that the increases did not
keep pace with inflation and the growth
in environmental programs, resulting in
increased enforcement responsibilities.
These findings further highlighted the
importance of the partnership and col-
laborative efforts between EPA and the
states presented in this report.
Tackling Complex
Environmental Issues
Mercury in the Environment
Well known for its award-winning work
on the removal of mercury switches
from automobiles, the Quicksilver Cau-
cus (QSC), a coalition of state govern-
ment environmental leaders, continues
to provide a forum for states to work
with EPA and other stakeholders to de-
velop collaborative, holistic approaches
for reducing mercury in the environ-
ment. EPA funding, provided through
an OCIR-ECOS cooperative agreement,
supports a number of activities. In 2007,
EPA and the QSC identified state
participants for the 2007 Federal Stake-
holder Panel for Managing Domestic
Stocks of Commodity-Grade Mercury
and the United Nations Environmen-
tal Program (UNEP) Open-Ended
Working Group on Mercury, en-
suring that state perspectives and
experiences were part of these two
processes. In addition, EPA and the
QSC collaborated to design a formal
"State Resources Network" of state
experts who can be called upon for
assistance on international mercury
activities under the United Nations
Global Mercury Partnerships. Currently,
there is a state expert supporting a mer-
cury products inventory in Mexico and
a pilot program to reduce mercury use
in hospitals in Costa Rica. In addition,
a state expert participated in a technical
mercury exchange workshop in Taiwan.
Starting with recommendations in the
Mercury-Added Product White Paper, EPA
and the QSC identified a set of mutual
priorities for future collaborative mer-
cury activities in 2007 and 2008. The first
specific EPA-state activity was initiated
in 2007 through the formation of a work
group on mercury thermostats. The work
group is preparing options for devel-
oping a national strategy to promote
increased collection and safe manage-
ment of existing mercury thermostats,
and to encourage the eventual phase-out
and elimination of mercury thermostat
manufacturing.
,-,
J
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
National Environmental
Performance Partnership
System (NEPPS)
Since 1995, OIR has been leading EPA's efforts
to develop and implement the National Environ-
mental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS).
NEPPS is a performance-based system of envi-
ronmental protection designed to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of EPA-state partner-
ships. Fundamental to NEPPS is joint planning
to ensure that national, regional, and state needs
and priorities are addressed. By focusing EPA and
state resources on the most pressing environmental
problems and taking advantage of the unique
capabilities of each partner, performance partner-
ships can help achieve the greatest environmental
and human health protection. More information
about NEPPS is available at: www.epa.gov/ocir/
nepps/.
NEPPS staff is responsible for ensuring this system
is implemented on a national level. Through policy
analysis, outreach efforts, and training seminars,
the staff advances NEPPS principles and the use of
Performance Partnership Agreements (PPAs) and
Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs).
Performance Partnership Agreements
A key tool for implementing performance partner-
ships on the ground, PPAs are agreements be-
tween individual states and EPA regional offices.
Each PPA is different, but they typically describe
jointly developed goals, objectives, and priorities;
the strategies the state and EPA will use to meet
goals and address them; the roles and responsibili-
ties of each partner; and the measures the state
will use to assess progress.
Nearly two-thirds of the states now negotiate PPAs
with EPA regions to capture the results of their
joint planning efforts. Other states and regions
also conduct joint planning, but do not necessarily
develop PPAs to document the results.
"HIIIM
Performance Partnership Grants
PPGs are also an important tool for implement-
ing NEPPS. With PPGs, states (and tribes) can
choose to combine two or more environmental
program grants into a single PPG. PPGs can
reduce administrative costs through streamlined
paperwork and accounting procedures; direct
EPA grant funds to priority environmental prob-
lems or program needs; and fund multimedia
approaches and initiatives that were difficult to
fund under traditional categorical grants.
States have used PPG flexibility in many ben-
eficial ways. For instance, states can use funds
from one program to address a budget shortfall in
another. Using PPG flexibility, states hire tempo-
rary personnel, fund emergency activities such as
hurricane response, address permit backlogs, and
support state training and travel. They also use
PPGs to fund multimedia inspections and permit-
ting, sector compliance/enforcement initiatives,
and data system improvements.
National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS)
-------
Maximizing PPGs Initiative
In FY 2007, EPA Deputy Administrator
Marcus Peacock launched an initiative
to demonstrate how PPGs could be bet-
ter used to support state environmental
programs. Throughout the year, OIR
worked with EPA and state leaders to
analyze the benefits PPGs already offer,
barriers to using PPGs, and possible
new incentives that would make PPGs
more attractive to states. Deputy Ad-
ministrator Peacock and ECOS President
Robert W. King, Jr. then invited states to
participate in the initiative and explore
ways they might get more value from
their PPGs in 2008 and beyond.
As part of the initiative:
* Massachusetts is exploring how PPGs
might be used to drive improvements
in performance measures and report-
ing, as well as to strengthen the tie
between strategic priorities and on-
the-ground activities.
• Virginia is planning a multimedia,
risk-based strategy for compliance
inspections to make more effective
use of resources.
• South Carolina added to the number
of grants in its PPG and entered into a
multiyear agreement that will reduce
administrative requirements and
provide greater opportunities to focus
resources on priority needs.
» Minnesota added more eligible grants
to their PPG and is exploring poten-
tial cross-cutting projects.
Nebraska added another grant to its
PPG that will help assure timely and
continuous funding, even if funding
for an individual program is delayed
for some reason.
EPA will use the lessons learned from
the initiative to inform improvements
in policies and procedures.
Partnering To Show Results
From State Grant Agreements
In EPAs FY 2007 budget, the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) —
which has governmentwide responsi-
bility for ensuring that resources for
government programs are achieving
their intended results—found that
EPA was facing difficulties in getting
states to report consistent, meaning-
ful performance information. To ad-
dress this concern, OMB directed EPA to
develop a standardized template, to be
used in all state grant agreements, that
includes clear links to EPAs Strategic
Plan and long-term and annual goals
and consistent requirements for regular
performance reporting, and allows for
meaningful comparisons between vari-
ous states' past and planned activities
and performance, making progress more
visible and programs more transparent.
Coordinating standardized template
development and implementation has
been one of OIR's most challenging
efforts. EPA worked with ECOS, the
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
various state media program associa-
tions, and individual states to develop
the template for the FY 2007 grants
(the template is also included in FY
2008 grants). The template includes
a standard set of measures for 14 key
air, water, waste, toxics, and pesti-
cides grant programs. Reports on the
measures will provide explanatory
information for situations in which a
state does not implement a particu-
lar program or EPA provides only a
portion (or none) of the funds that
support a state's activities to achieve
an environmental outcome.
The template was an interim step
toward addressing the OMB require-
ment for a more consistent approach
to conveying state grant information.
During 2007, EPA and states continued
their collaborative effort to develop an
approach for reporting and compiling
information from the template, and to
develop a standardized method for or-
ganizing state grant work plans.
Use of Performance Partnership Tools
State Environmental Agencies
Performance Partnership Agreements (PPAs) and Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs)
The map below shows the use of PPAs
and PPGs in the United States as of
December 2007.
EPA-State Collaboration To
Reduce State Reporting
Burden
Making sure that EPA and states col-
lect only the information that is truly
needed is an important component of
a credible performance management
system. In October 2006, EPA and states
launched an effort to address longstand-
ing state concerns about burdensome
state reporting requirements. Nearly 40
states indicated more than 200 report-
ing requirements they considered most
burdensome and of low value in man-
aging environmental programs. The
recommendations cut across all EPA
programs.
OIR oversees this Agency wide reporting
burden initiative. Official memoranda
and other background materials, as well
National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS)
-------
as summaries of all state recommenda-
tions and the status of their implemen-
tation can be found at: www.epa.gov/
ocir/nepps/burden.html.
During 2007, EPA committed to making
changes that would implement nearly
60 percent of the state recommenda-
tions by the end of 2008. Some report-
ing changes have already been made.
Among state reporting requirements
that have been eliminated is an annual
report of the percentage of wastewater
plants that reuse sewage sludge each
year. States also no longer need to sub-
Reporting Burden Reduction
Recommendations Adopted
by EPA* (239 proposed)
Mar
2007
Sept
2007
May
2008
Oct
2008
"'will be implemented by the end ofFYOS.
mit an annual hard copy report of air
monitoring data because the informa-
tion is already reported electronically.
EPA has also changed the frequency
of several reports. For example, states
now provide financial status reports
on state grants once a year instead of
quarterly, and the frequency of vari-
ous Superfund reports will be nego-
tiated between EPA and individual
states and tribes.
EPA continues to evaluate the remain-
ing state suggestions for possible
implementation in the future. In some
cases, statutory or regulatory changes
may be required.
Taking Environmental Protection
to the Next Level-The 2007
NAPA Report
In May 2007, a panel of the National
Academy of Public Administration
(NAPA) issued a report recommending
ways federal, state, and local govern-
ments can work together more effective-
ly in solving environmental problems.
The report—Taking Environmental
Protection to the Next Level: An
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
Assessment of
the U.S. En-
vironmental
Services Deliv-
ery System—is
the result of a
study request-
ed by OMB
and autho-
rized by Con-
gress in EPA's
FY 2004 budget. NAPA conducted the
three-year project under OIR manage-
ment and oversight.
NAPA's report identifies challenges in
meeting environmental goals when a
wide array of federal, state, and local
governments must work together, and
success depends on both regulatory and
"Increasingly, EPA and states need
to work with agriculture, health,
economic development, transporta-
tion, energy, and other agencies on
environmental matters. Such cross-
agency arrangements used to be the
exception, now they are becoming
the rule."
Deputy Administrator Marcus Peacock,
commenting on NAPA's report in a
speech to ECOS in September 2007, rein-
forcing the need for collaboration among
many agencies.
voluntary actions. NAPA found that
NEPPS has become an increasingly signif-
icant force within EPA for aligning EPA's
own planning, measurement, and budget-
ing processes with those in the states.
To develop its insights and recommen-
dations, the NAPA panel conducted an
in-depth case study of Chesapeake Bay
cleanup efforts and less detailed reviews
of several other environmental programs.
NAPA concluded: "Collaboration is no
longer a matter of choice for EPA in
deciding how environmental services
are to be delivered. Collaboration is now
an essential tool in addressing ecosys-
tem and watershed-based problems that
require cooperation from a wide range of
actors."
NAPA urged EPA to strengthen its role as
a partnering agency and to support the
intergovernmental coordinating bodies
needed to ensure that regional environ-
mental goals are met. To speed water
quality improvements nationwide, NAPA
recommended establishing a systematic
impaired waters program. NAPA also
advised EPA to enhance performance
management systems, implement inno-
vations more quickly, and continue using
scientific research and data as the basis
for policymaking.
The report is available online from
NAPA at: www.napawash.org/resources/
morenews.html.
National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS)
-------
Closing Remarks
By Randy Kelly
OIR looks forward to working diligently in 2008
to increase our effectiveness and to identify new
ways to add value as we serve our state and local
partners. We will examine, improve, and update
our Web site and keep it current. We will contin-
ue to share best practices and highlight examples
of how communities are developing sustainable
methods to improve the environment and protect
public health.
In 2007 we made a special effort to look for ways
to partner and collaborate with other federal
agencies. We will continue to look for further op-
portunities during 2008.
We have begun participating in EPA's Green
Building Workgroup and will explore opportu-
nities to provide information and assistance to
local units of government that wish to develop
green building strategies. Specific areas we are
researching include efforts around the country
to "green" professional sports
facilities. These are high profile
buildings where environmental
improvements in energy savings,
recycling, and water usage can be
demonstrated and shared.
Again, we look forward to build-
ing new and stronger partner-
ships in 2008 and expanding our
efforts to help accelerate the pace
of environmental protection.
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
Looking Forward
By Chris Bliley, Associate Administrator for Office
of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
As you can see, 2007 was a busy and produc-
tive year for OIR. Our tremendous outreach to
state and local partners, their enhanced involve-
ment in EPA policy and programs, and our strong
working relationships have established a sturdy
foundation for continued success in 2008.
Environmental protection is truly a partnership:
EPA can only accomplish its mission by work-
ing with citizens and stakeholders, especially
state and local governments. We take seriously
our charge to ensure that our government part-
ners have a seat at the table when the Agency
considers critical decisions. We also want to be
sure that the nation's governors, mayors, com-
missioners, and state legislators have a seat for
us at their
table, because
we recognize
unique environ-
mental solutions
come from cities,
towns, and states
across the country.
For 2008, we look
forward to greater opportunities for partnership
and environmental success. It is an exciting time
to be in the business of environmental protec-
tion, and it is immensely rewarding to work with
the country's state and local officials to achieve
our mutual goals. As we have learned, for any of
us to achieve complete success, we all must be
successful together.
Looking Forward
-------
Office of Intergovernmental Relations Contact Information
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Mail Code 1301A
Washington, DC 20460
Office: Ariel Rios North 3442
Phone: 202-564-7178
Fax: 202-501-1545
Web Site: www.epa.gov/ocir
Kelly, Randy
Deputy Associate
Administrator
Intergovernmental Relations
202-564-3126
Kelly.Randy@epa.gov
Bowles, Jack
Director, State and
Local Relations
202-564-3657
Bowles.Jack@epa.gov
Cunningham, Robert
Senior Counsel
202-564-9562
Cunningham.Robert@epa.gov
Davis, Mary Jane
Information
Management Clerk
202-564-0248
Davis.MaryJane@epa.gov
Eargle, Frances
DFO, LGAC
202-564-3115
Eargle.Frances@epa.gov
Fletcher, Donna
Senior Analyst
202-564-7504
Fletcher.Donna@epa.gov
Hannon, Arnita
Intergovernmental Liaison
202-564-3704
Hannon.Arnita@epa.gov
Hanson, Andrew
Intergovernmental Liaison
202-564-3664
Hanson.Andrew@epa.gov
Harrison, Michael
Special Assistant
202-564-0966
Harrison.Michael@epa.gov
Killer-Purvis, Michelle
Senior Policy Advisor/
ECOS Liaison
202-564-3702
Hiller-Purvis.Michelle®
epa.gov
Means-Thomas, Janet
Staff Assistant (detail)
202-564-2454
Means-Thomas.Janet@
epa.gov
Meni, Reynold
Attorney/Advisor
202-564-3669
Meni.Reynold@epa.gov
Ney, Denise
Environmental Scientist
202-564-3684
Ney.Denise@epa.gov
Osinski, Mike
Director, Performance
Partnerships
202-564-3792
Osinski.Mike@epa.gov
Peters, Matthew
Management Analyst
202-564-0222
Peters .Matthew® epa.gov
Randolph, Anne
Correspondence and
Intergovernmental Liaison
202-564-3679
Randolph.Anne@epa.gov
Raymond, Anna
DFO, SCAS
202-564-3663
Raymond.Anna@epa.gov
Scott, Sonya
Administrative Assistant
202-564-8229
Scott.Sonya@epa.gov
Tillery, Loreto
Information Management
Specialist
202-564-2791
Tillery.Loreto@epa.gov
Tyler, Kendra
Intergovernmental Liaison
202-250-8807
Tyler.Kendra@epa.gov
Wieber, Jim
Special Assistant
202-564-3662
Wieber.Jim@epa.gov
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
Appendix
Outreach Meetings
Governors
1. Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK)
2. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA)
3. Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN)
4. Governor Jennifer Granholm (D-MI)
5. Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN)
6. Governor Haley Barbour (R-MS)
7. Governor John Hoeven (R-ND)
8. Governor Rick Perry (R-TX)
9. Governor Jon Huntsman (R-UT)
10. Governor John DeJongh Jr. (D-VI)
11. Governor Jim Doyle (D-WI)
Mayors
1. John Hickenlooper (Denver, CO)
2. David Smith (Newark, CA)
3. Patrick McCrory (Charlotte, NC)
4. Martin Chavez (Albuquerque, NM)
5. Dan Coody (Fayetteville, AR)
6. James Brainard (Carmel, IN)
7. Richard Daley (Chicago, IL)
8. Gary Becker (Racine, WI)
9. George Heartwell (Grand Rapids, MI)
10. Terry Estness (Wauwatosa, WI)
11. Al Larson (Schaumburg, IL)
12. Don L. Robart (Cuyahoga Falls, OH)
13. Marty Blum (Santa Barbara, CA)
14. Euline Brock (Denton, TX)
15. Christopher L. Calbaldon (West Sacramento, CA)
16. Joseph M. Delfino (White Plains, NY)
17. Kenneth A. Flatto (Fairfield, CT)
18. Kevin C. Foy (Chapel Hill, NC)
19. Mufi Hannemann (Honolulu, HI)
20. Kenneth Fallows (Wadsworth, OH)
21. Marilyn Murrell (Arcadia, OK)
22. Chuck Reed (San Jose, CA)
23. Dale M. Uehling (Ottumwa, IA)
24. Jamie Mayo (Monroe, LA)
25. George Grace (St. Gabriel, LA)
26. John White (Ames, TX)
27. WJ. Jones (Coahoma, MS)
28. James Perkins (Selma, AL)
29. [VICE MAYOR] Lori Van Arsdale (Hemet, CA)
30. R. T. Rybak (Minneapolis, MN)
31. Jerry Sanders (San Diego, CA)
32. Willie Burns (Washington, GA)
33. Jennifer Hosterman (Pleasanton, CA)
Appendix
-------
34. Elizabeth Kautz (Burnsville, MN)
35. Doug Palmer (Trenton, NJ)
36. Robert J. Duffy (Rochester, NY)
37. Rita Mullins (Palatine, IL)
38. Tom Barreto (Milwaukee, WI)
39. Michael Belsky (Highland Park, IL)
40. Kevin Romick (Oakley, CA)
41. Delia Perkins (Princeville, NC)
42. Milton Tutwiler (Winstonville, MS)
43. Patrick Campbell (Jonestown, MS)
44. Eulis A. Willis (Navaza, NC)
45. Frank Jackson (Prairie View, TX)
46. Ron Dellums (Oakland, CA)
47. Bill White (Houston, TX)
48. J. Christian Bollwage (Elizabeth, NJ)
49. Roosevelt Dorn (Inglewood, CA)
50. Graham Richard (Fort Wayne, IN)
51. Roger Burne (Vernon Hills, IL)
52. Jim Schmitt (Green Bay, WI)
53. Patrick H. Hays (North Little Rock, AR)
54. William Phalen (Quincy, MA)
Council Members
1. Debbie W Quinn (Fairhope, AL)
2. Sandy Colvin Roy (Minneapolis, MN)
3. Claude Mattox (Phoenix, AZ)
4. Makia M. Epie (Cedar Hill, TX)
5. Joe Moore (Alderman, Chicago, IL)
6. Debbie Kring (Mission, KS)
7. Dena Mossar (Palo Alto, CA)
8. Nancy Carter (Charlotte, NC)
9. Margaret Clark (Rosemead, CA)
10. Robert A. Coleman (Paducah, KY)
11. Henrietta Davis (Cambridge, MA)
12. Judith Davis (Greenbelt, MD)
13. David M. Mosby (Oak Ridge, TN)
14. Clair Muller (Atlanta, GA)
15. Robert J. Stevenson (Rochester, NY)
16. Randal Wallace (Myrtle Beach, SC)
17. Gene Belmares (Laredo, TX)
18. Bill Spriggs (Chair, Merced County Assn.
of Govts.-Merced, CA)
19. Kathy Jimino (Rensselaer County, NY)
20. John Drobinski (Sudbury, MA)
21. Nancy Goulard (Dighton, MA)
2007 Annual Report: Office of Intergovernmental Relations
-------
Appendix (continued)
Local Government Representatives
1. Arturo Duran (Laredo, TX)
2. Horacio DeLeon, Jr. (Laredo, TX)
3. Hector F. Gonzalez (Laredo, TX)
4. Miguel Pesardor (Laredo, TX)
5. Riazul Mia (Laredo, TX)
6. Allyn Howe (Laredo, TX)
7. Yakov Shadevich (Laredo, TX)
8. John Creer (Itta Bena, MS)
9. Willie O'Neal (Jackson, MS)
10. Derrick Starling (Jackson, MS)
11. Jim Marshall (Merced, CA)
12. Hicham Eltal (Merced County Association
of Governments [MCAG])
13. Candice Steelman (MCAG)
14. Lynnette Gerbi (MCAG)
15. MarjieKirn (MCAG)
16. Richard Green (MCAG)
17. Jesse Brown (MCAG)
18. Christopher Cooper (Gainesville, FL)
19. Peter Kavounas (Glendale, CA)
20. Sandra L. Fisher (Miami, FL)
21. Keith Hite (Enola, PA)
22. Debbie Driskell (Fishers, IN)
23. Jim Fisher (Zim, MN)
24. Michael Cochran (Blacklick, OH)
25. David Fricke (St. Michael, MN)
26. Jeffrey Haber (Albany, NY)
27. Olen Kibler (Newman, IL)
28. Larry Merrill (Lansing, MI)
29. Bart Russell (West Hartford, CT)
30. Bryan Smith (Springfield, IL)
31. John H. Spinks, Sr. (Fishers, IN)
32. Richard J. Stadelman (Shawano, WI)
33. Ken Yantes (Berthold, ND)
34. Nancy Barsness (Cyrus, MN)
35. Bruce Tobey (LGAC)
36. Brad Swing (Boston, MA)
37. Alan Cathcart (Concord, MA)
38. Thorn Duga (Commonwealth of Massachusetts)
39. Marcia Crowley (Wayland, MA)
40. Tom Philbin (Massachusetts Municipal
Association)
Appendix
-------
: •>
:
^ -I'
-------
------- |