U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC)'s

Small Community Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS)

March 26,2014
Meeting Summary

The Meeting Summary that follows reflects what was conveyed during the course of! he meeting
thai is summarizedThe Committee is not responsible far any j.otential inaccuracies that max
appear in the meeting summary as a result of informal ion conveyed Moreover, the Committee
advises that additional information sources be consulted in cases where any concern may exist
about statistics or any other information within the Meeting Summary.

1 I ' -• P r

-------
SMALL COMMUNITY ADVISORY SUBCOMMITTEE

I,	Call to Order/Welcome/Introductions

Chairman Commissioner Robert Cope called the meeting to order, and completed a roll
call ol' SCAS members, EPA participants and members of the public.

[Commissioner Cope began a round of introductions and announced (Commissioner Don
Larson of Brooking County, South Dakota as the new SCAS I'ice-chair].

A,	Meeting Purpose

The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the affordabilitv of HPA regulations, and work
on plans to increase integrated planning and affordabilily particularly in regarding to
building water infrastructure.

B.	Remarks by the Chair

Commissioner Cope stated that the SCAS has worked on the affordabilitv of regulations
for several years. Although environmental sustainability is important, unaffordable
regulations cannot he economical1}' sustained. He noted that EPA Office of Water ( QW)
officials were in attendance and had been working with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) to produce guidance documents, toolboxes and reference materials
for decentralized septic systems. HPA's representatives were on the agenda to provide
updates on their activities. The SCAS had provided OW with recommendations, and had
worked intensively on U.S.-Mexico border water infrastructure issues and the EPA
Strategic Plan. The SCAS also is addressing agricultural issues, including particulate
matter regulations.

II.	Remarks by Mark Rupp

Mr. Rupp Uianked SCAS members for their service and participation. He noted that
integrated plannirg and affordabilitv are important issues for all government agencies,
such as the U.S. Conference of Mayors, National Association of Counties (NACo) and
National League of Cities. EPA has been working with those associations.

Ill, Remarks hv Deborah Nagle, EI'A's Office of Water

A, Remarks

Vis. Nagle provided an overview of HPA's integrated planning and affordabilitv
initiative. Several years ago, integrated planning was put forward as the potential best
approach for addressing the stormwater and wastewater treatment issues faced by
communities. Integrated planning considers the amount of time communities have to
attain compliance with stonnwater and wastewater treatment regulator) requirements.
The result is a compliance schedule as part of a permit or a consent agreement with the
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA). Afiordability is the locus of

-------
compliance schedules. Communities responded favorably lo many aspects of EPA" s
financial capability guidance document, originally intended for combined sewer
overflows (CSOsh but they also pointed out that it did not capture the breadth of
community affordability concerns.

B.	Discussion

EPA responded to community concerns by developing a framework that expands the
Agency's concepts for determining affordability, The document was delivered to the U.S.
Conference of Mayors, MACo and National League of Cities on December 13, 2013.
Responding to these organizations' comments, lite EPA has revised the framework and
sent it back lor consideration. After the organizations aoprove t ic revised framework, the
HP A will submit it to the Agency's Environmental Financial Advisors Board for review,

C.	Remarks by Loren Denton, EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance

Ms. Loren Denton explained that the 1997 C50 financial capability guidance was
developed by the OW and implemented primarily by OECA, and is used to determine
compliance schedules for communities with CSC) problems. In applying the guidance,
EPA discovered thai cities raised "other considerations" that the document did not
discuss. The guidance remains ihe backbone of OECA's efforts because it is easy to use
in communities of different sizes, but addressing other considerations is more difficult.
Basically, the guidance can be used to determine if Clean Water Act (CWA) regulations
impose a low. medium or high burden on communities, using elements such as median
household income (MHI), which is controversial because it divides the entire community
into low- and high-income populations without indicating how tow-income residents will
be helped. EPA regards the MHI div ide as a continuum, not a black-and-white
affordability division.

I). Discussion

The issue of drinking water costs is raised frequently by communities. In some
communities, the wastewater and drinking water treatment facilities are distinct, but in
others funding comes from a single account. I'he CSO guidance stipulates that drinking
water costs cannot be included in an MHI calculation, but the EPA recognizes thai
communities bear those costs. Nevertheless, the agency wants drinking water and
wastewater addressed separately to avoid relegating CWA compliance to a position of
marginal importance compared with the health concerns associated with drinking water
treatment.

Commissioner Copt* asked if the extent to which families in ei mm unities have incomes

below the poverty level is considered when the agency develops its MHI figures. Mr,
Denton responded that it is not a factor in the Ml II number, but EPA considers the issue
on a case-by-case basis in enforcement actions and is in discussion wiih communities
about the issue, Commissioner Cope urged the EPA to consider the median age in
communities because older residents are sometimes on fixed incomes (but considered
above the poverty level). Mr. Denton suggested that the concept might tit in EPA's draft
framework under the category "other breakdowns." He stated that the EPA is considering

-------
whether comrnunities have the ability to set differential rate structures for residents with
lower income, but mayors and utilities dislike that option even though nothing in the
CWA precludes such rates.

Mayor Bi.vson stated thai in his community, residents effectively adopted low-flow
fixtures and other measures to reduce water consumption, but as a result the community
had lo raise rales because lower water usage decreased -water sales and revenue was
insufficient to pay for a S4 million ic-n exchange treatment plant. Ms. Nagle responded
that the HP A is not forcing these factors on communities: rather, communities decide
which factors are important to them when analyzing aflbrdability.

Mayor Karen Freeman-Wilson of Gary. Indiana, asked if :he EPA's budget includes
funding to conduct integrated planning pilot projects in communities. Ms. Nagle
responded that it does not, but EPA is alwavs looking for opportunities lo provide such
support and communities should "stay tuned" as Congress reviews the EPA's proposed
fiscal year 2015 budget. Executive Director Kevin Shafcr of the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage District (MSSD) added that the MSSD completed an integrated
plan in 2008 and recommended the process for other communities and to consider
drinking water, surface water and ground water in an integrated wa\.

Mayor Johnny BuPree of Hattiesburg. Mississippi, heartily agreed with the earlier
statement. "If you can 1 afford it. it's no! sustainable.'" fhe problem his community is
facing in complying with the CWA is that there is no money to do it. lie stated that it is
"virtually un afford able." and if the desire is to adopt green technologies and practices,
"someone has to help us figure out how to afford it" because the costs cannot all be
placed on water consumers. Commissioner Cope concurred, and commented that
communities have made great strides, but as water quality standards become more
stringent, a point of diminishing returns is reached and communities cannot do an\ more.

Commissioner Larson agreed, adding that in rural America, communities understand the
benefits and drawbacks of where they are living, and accept that they live with risks in
their water supply. He added, "every community is different, so blanket rules and
regulations don 7 work" fhe reward/risk ratios differ in every community. Mayor Pro
tern Circo added that the issue applies not just to EPA regulations. In Kansas City, police
and fire protection costs increase substantially farther away from the core area where
people live Peopie choosing to live away from the core areas face diilerenl risks. Is it
necessary to provide everyone with the same level of services?

Director Gonzalez stated that various types of communities are facing the same issues.
Standards that protect public health are needed, but a way must be found to work with
local communities, municipalities and utilities to bridge the funding gap. 1 Ic asked how
the public can be informed about the risks so that thev can make informed decisions. The
SCAS, Protecting America's Waters and EJ Workgroups are discussing these questions
and are aiming to offer recommendations to the EPA. Other members offered comments
on the importance of facing difficult risk-versus-performance choices in small and large
communities and of sequencing mitigation steps.

4

-------
VIr. Demon responded thai the (AVA presents a "brigh- line." but the r.PA will not be
aggressive in enforcement about episodic extreme wea'.her events, lie remarked that iTA

wants the cities to address their greatest environmental problems first, though ultimately
the agency wants all problems addressed "within the financial capability of the
community."

Commissioner Cope and others underscored the rcuiitv that some source water in
mountainous areas will have background arsenic levels that exceed the standard. VJa>or

Murrell added that some towns cannot afford to comply and added, "If we 're not careful,
the federal government is going to regulate small towns right out of business.Because
"some problems dim t have a solution," rules and regulations must be flexible to be
affordable. Director Gonzalez acknowledged that standards are needed, and agreed with
comments thai the ability of science to detect low contaminant levels is outpacing the
infrastructure to address the problems. 1 le commended the EPA for tr> ing to work with
communities on these issues, but noted that other federal agencies do not partner and
coordinate with communities in the same way. Mayor Elizabeth Kautz of Bumsville,
Minnesota, also thanked the EPA for understanding that communities cannot be the
enforcer of the lead and copper rules, but can educate residents about the problem. She
asked; "The cost is now prohibitive to our ratepayers, so how do nr get there? Can it he
done in a reasonable way?" Mayor Lisa Wong of Fitchburg, Massachusetts, described
"emerging best practices'" involving the Federal Reserve, which is providing funds to end
poverty. Public health organizations potentially will provide millions of additional dollars
because they also recognize the benefits. uTackling po\erty translates into sustainahility
in terms of dollars. "

Mayor Murrell noted that she has been asking why the federal government, which
subsidizes housing and public health centers, cannot subsidize water treatment if that is
the most important environmental issue facing communities. Ms. Nagle said that as an
estimate 20,000 people per state lack wastewater treatment, with a larger number likely
for drinking water.

Legislator Manna Jo Greene of Ulster County, New York, asked whether taxes are
progressive or regressive, as weil as how is the money coming into government. She
suggested developing a 'New Green Deal* to actively transition from an economy
dependent on fossil fuels to a green energy economy. Mayor Wong noted that to succeed
in transitioning to a green energy economy, more students in economic > will need 1o
focus on energy and environmental issues. Today we have both imperfect information
and large disparities in income. These issues need to be easily understandable and ensure
that decisions represent the entire community.

IV. Public Comments

Commissioner Cope called for public comments. Ms. Eargle remarked that no public
comments had been registered in advance of the meeting. [Hearing no public comments.
Commissioner Cope proceeded with the agenda].

1

-------
Building Resilient Water Infrastructure

Ms. Ke! lie Kubena and Mr. .Tim Home of EPA" s Office of Wastewater Management
opened the discussion. Ms. Kubena thanked the SCAS for helping HPA understand how
to better serve poor and underserved communities. The OVs Sustainable Communities
Branch is trying to e\aluate what is sustainable for communities environmentally,
economically and for public health. She credited SCAS with initiating the discussion and
emphasizing the issues of climate change and resiliency. She said that Mr. 1 lorne would
talk about some steps OW already has taken on those issues and that she would pose
some questions for SCAS that will help HPA understand what communities most need
and identify potential Agency partners.

Mr. Horne slated that water and wastewater utilities are inextricably linked to sustainable
communities. He shanked SCAS members for their letter of recommendation sent to
Administrator McCarthy. } le said that the HP A has been working to develop a way for
small, rural water and wastewater systems to assess the overall effectiveness of their
operations, looking at 10 key management areas. These include such matters as managing
hard infrastructure and communicating with the local community to achieve a 360-degree
view of how systems can be more resilient.

KPA and USDA are now working on a methodology for local officials and utility
managers to determine the strengths and weaknesses in their systems and to select the
right tool to address their issues. The project has produced a "Rural and Small Systems
Guidebook to Sustainable Utility Management." which was developed in collaboration
with small and rural system managers. It will train small and rural utility managers in the
assessment approach USDA and HPA developed to help focus limited resources. The
National Rural Water Association (NRWA) is an important partner with which the HPA
is about to execute a competitive grant agreement. Under the agreement. NRWA will
hold many other workshops. HPA wants to determine if the approach works on the
ground.

OW just completed another practical document—"LMoving Toward Suslainahility
Sustainable and Effective Practices for Creating Your Water Utility Roadmap" which
provides another level of detail for implementing a broad assessment approach that is
applicable to small, medium and large utilities. The practices arc organized on three
levels: (T) the basic level, to meet compliance requirements: (2) the second level, which
goes beyond compliance to optimize operations through energy efficiency and other
practices: and (3) the third level, which is transformative—these practices are being
adopted b\ larger utilities that view themselves as "utility of the future" resource-
recovery facilities. Besides treating wastewater, transformative utilities, for example, use
embedded energy in their wastewater to provide power to their facilities and actively
engage in exploring economic development issues that can benefit the utility and the
community The third level of the roadmap is to help utilities move in the direction of
transforming the way they do business because it will have positive economic impacts.
One section of the roadmap is devoted to resiliency, a topic OW is focusing on.
especially in regavd to smaller communities. Resiliency has a cost as a capital-intensive

-------
set of activities, including green infrastructure. The roadmap will be published within a
week to 10 days,

Vlr. Hume praised Mr. Dan Roberts of the City of Palm Ba\ (l;I.) Utilities, who ser\ed
on the roadmap Steering Group and provided excellent advice based on Palm Ba> "s

complete commitment to sustainability in the face of daunting economic circumstances,

Ms. Kubena slated (hat the questions she wanted the SCAN me iibers u> address pertained
lo the biggest resiliency challenges they see as eommunin leaders, for both elimate-

related and non-eliniate-related events. She asked what the EPA should be thinking about
and who the Agency should be partnering with on those issues.

Commissioner ( ope commented that all counties should have hazard mitigation plans
and urged the SCAS mayors to become involved if they have not aire idy done so to

ensure that all counties are addressing potential elimate events, as required by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (I I-MA). Resiliency means planning for all kinds of
emergencies and hazards.

Executive Director Jeffrey Tiberi of the Montana Association of Conservation Districts
commented on the choice of language, noting, for example, that wastewater should be
called "energy water" as a way to stimulate thinking about opportunities rather than the
traditional utility function of treating water. A challenge lor small communities is how to

get people to think in different terms at the community level. He added: "As community

leaders, vie have to select the right words, and we have to do it all the time."

Mayor Carolyn Peterson of Ithaca. New York, described her uasteuatcr s>stern {built
in the PH)80s) which is shared by three communities. The s\stem was upgraded and now

is transformative in using methane to generate power for the facilities. It has prompted a
broader community and great excitement among employees. That excitement is another
kind of transformation that also should be conveyed to communities through various
programs.

Commissioner Larson emphasized that partners are critical to achieve any goals. One
major partner is the private sector, which should be active partners to help promote
acceptance of the sus:ainabilil> roadmap.

Drought and Resiliency Planning

Mr. Roger Gorke, i'.PA's OW, who serves as the liaison to the Western States Water
Council (WSWC). stated that much of what Ms. Kubena and Mr. Home had just
discussed is what the EPA has been discussing with the WSWC with regard to the
drought in that region., federal agencies have addressed drought, starting with a White
House Cabinet meeting in late 2012. which led to the USDA led development of the
National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF). There are outreach sessions held
throughout the country defining federal government's acthittes directed at the drought.
The President's Climate Action Plan included a National Drought Resilience Partnership

-------
(NDRP). which way announced in December 2013. Partnership members include [{PA,
USDA. f'HMA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). the
Army Corps of Engineers and the Department ofr.nergy.

The NDRP was invoked to address the California drought. And the government
conscioush aimed to apply resilience lessons learned during the California drought crisis
to other parts of the country. Two months ago. President Ob am a toured the California
drought areas and a few weeks ago he met with eight western governors. He emphasized
that states must help take a leadership role in responding to drought and water scarcity.
The focus is to provide communities with the resources and technical information the\
need to achieve resiliency. Mr. Gcrke described a non-federal water recycling project in
California that enabled treated wir.er to very high levels (at great expense) to be used by
farmers rather than being discharged into the San Joaquin River. Farmers helped to pay
for the infrastructure to cary the treated water to the Dclta-Mcndota Canal, thereby
guaranteeing farmers up to 60,000 acrc-feet of water at a time when the cost of water has
risen tenfold.

The federal government is aligning agencies on several issues. First, the President
recently signed the reauthorization of the National Integrated Drought Information
System (NIDIS). which operates the droimht.oov website, a portal with extensive
information and a single point of contact to improve drought forecasting. Second, the
federal government is working on infrastructure to better capture precipitation. Third, the
government is focusing on managing federal lands to better support clean water for
communities that need it. Last, federal agencies arc developing or changing policies or
regulations and providing incentives for drought preparedness across the country.

L{PA has implemented various programs relevant to drought. Mr. Gorke is working to
create an inventory of existing programs and tools, and assessing whether communities
have the tools that they need. He listed such activities as WaterSense, water conservation,
the 2012 guidance on reuse and recycling, stormwater capture and others. HPA is also
considering a request to use treated wastewater in drinking water systems, working on a
drought checklist for communities, and pursuing other actions aimed at planning for
drought (rather than reacting once drought occurs). The issues of jurisdiction and water
use arc resolved on a state-bv-state basis. EPA could consider water quality and quantity
together without mandating action by the states; the federal government could provide
information and tools to better manage both jointly.

SCAS members offered examples of issues they confront in managing various
contaminants in different sources of water. Because of the drought, water now is being
reused extensively. In the water-rich Hudson River area, a private corporation built a
desalination plant at the mouth of the river, even though it is the least eillcient way to
obtain water.

Ms. Alison Wiedeman, HPA's Acting Agriculture Advisor to Administrator McCarthy,
was introduced. Commissioner Cope noted that numerous issues the SCAS addresses
have agriculture implications. Commissioner Larson urgeo. broadening the discussion ol
agriculture issues to include wrater and resiliency as it applies to the nation. Water
provides food, fiber and fuel. He urged the EPA to worx with land grant universities to

-------
understand the research they perform on drought-resistant crop varieties. C 'nmmissioncr
('opt- also emphasized partnerships between loea! government. HP A and other federal

agencies. There is a certain amount of risk that needs to he accepted in setting thresholds.

Executive Director Shafer lauded the EPA Administrator for having an agriculture
ad\ isor. He suggested the Farm Bill's Regional Conscrxalion Partnership Program
(RCPP) could he a way to bring together urban and rural partners. VK Wiedeman
responded that she will look into the KCPP, and she offered to participate in future
meetings if the SCAS wanted to focus on agriculture.

Mayor Dixson said that throughout Oklahoma. Kansas and the High Plains, the I'SDA
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) has been holding listening sessions to determine it"
the ARS is doing what producers need to maximize research dollars. 1 unding is very
limited, and ARS should be working on drought-resisiant miio and sorghum. There are

some significant programs in which EPA could partner with USD A to leverage collective
expertise. Ms. Wiedeman responded that effective coordination is necessary because
resources cannot be wasted. Administrator McCarthy wants to develop partnerships with
the SCAS and the agricultural community. She invited SC' AS to contact her if the group
has ideas for partnerships with IT A.

Washington State Representative Jeff Morris commented that the biggest impact on
the agricultural community- will be the expiration of the biomass exemption in 2014, He
asked about the status of that decision. Ms. Wiedeman said that she would follow up with
Representative Munis on the issue. Director Hernandez emphasized the need to
maintain pesticide safety standards for workers and i'PA's role as the central point for
information regarding safe practices. Ms. Wiedeman responded that she would pass the
message on to the HPA's pesticide program.

Commissioner Larson noted that a South Dakota laboratory is working on drought-
resistant varieties nf crops and urged the EPA not to underestimate fuiure technologies
and to partake in public-private partnerships to make such endeavors successful.

VII. SCAS Business Meeting

Commissioner ( ope noted that the draft LGAC letter io EPA Administrator McCarthy
regarding EPA's I .cud and Copper Rule (I.CR'i had been substantially re\ ised by the I-'.I

Workgroup. He welcomed any comments and concerns from the small community
standpoint. EPA already made major changes to the I.CR, removing the proposal to have
home inspections for lead and copper.

Mayor Dixson staled that the goal is to convey to SCAS members both current

developments and future challenges. The draft LCR letter will go to the LGAC for
approval after the SCAS has reviewed it and discussed any concerns. Commissioner
Larson moved that the draft letter be approved by the SCAS members and encouraged
them to read the penultimate paragraph, which stated, in part; "The important message is
that citizens will need to be personally responsible for their drinking water safety." The

9 | '

-------
motion io approve the LCR letter to the IXjAC was seconded, and unanimously

approved.

The SCAS then discussed the I-J Workgroup's Draft letter on the Worker Protection
Standard (WPS) which is intended to reduce risks and injury to farmworkers and their
families. Mr. Kevin Kcancy, the Chief of HPA's Pesticide Workers Safety Program, was
available to answer questions.

Mayor Peterson said that she contacted the director of the Cornell Farmworker Program,
Ms. Mary Jo Dudley, to seek her views on the SCAS letter. She raised a question about
how family farms are defined and why they continue to be exempt. Mr. Keaney
responded that in the past EPA had been criticized when attempting to address family
farm issues because the working assumption is that farmers are concerned about their
family's salcty, whereas o::her populations are disenfranchised and need federal
information and support to help protect them. Noniamily workers on family farms are
covered by regulations, and even farms that employ only family members must adhere to
labeling and other laws.

Mayor Wong commented that her community has no farms, so she relies on other SCAS
members to understand how the WPS affects farms. Approaching the issue from a food
safety perspective, she made rev isions to the draft letter because food safely is a
completely separate issue and the SCAS should address it elsewhere. Commissioner
Cope expressed concerns that the WPS would preclude traditional farming community
practices in which farmers working with others might ask a neighbor's child to help spray
safe pesticides on cows. 11c was concerned that mercury-based fungicides and all other
pesticides would be placed inappropriately in a single class, which would create
significant problems for farming communities. Mr. Keaney responded that the WPS
regulates the safe early entry into a sprayed field, and only mentions age limits in that
context because physical protections and other precautions are needed in such situations.
Responding to a question. Mr. Keaney stated that HPA delegates the WPS programs to
state departments of agriculture to implement and enforce and works with land grant
universities on training.

Director Gonzalez noted that the involvement of state departments of health strengthens
the safety program. The SCAS draft letter calls for requiring that pesticide exposures,
which currently are unreported, must be reported by doctors across the board. Mr.

Keaney noted that EPA is working with Florida. Louisiana find North Carolina to
improve the capacity' of their health departments to report information about exposure
incidents to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ;CDC). Acute incidents,
which are known to occur but are notoriously undcrreported. could lead to chronic effects
over time.

Commissioner Larson commented that he understood the T.PA's efforts to provide a
family farm exemption to the WPS, but added his concern that these regulations could
make young workers on a family farm violators, or impinge on parents' ability to train
their children to be responsible for the farm work. Mr. Kcancy responded that the W7PS
retains the family exemption, but defines the protections for other classes of laborers,
such as pruners/pickers and pesticides applicators.

10 I P a 3 e

-------
Mayor Murrell emphasized that the WPS addresses farming for crops, not ranching, In
its deliberations to draft the WPS letter, the SCAS wanted to focus its concerns
specifically on crop-fanning issues us they pertain to family farms and llie different kinds
of laborers, whether family members or hired workers. Other it sues can be dealt with in

future letters addressing other topics.

Commissioner Cope added that the SCAS members, agreed on the purpose of WPS. but
wanted lo avoid unintended consequences. He asked fcr and received a motion from

Mayor Dixson to insert additional language into the draft letter. The SCAS generally
favors the WPS. but wants clarification to ensure that farm families are not subject to the
controls and regulations. Some members commented that the WPS already includes such
an exemption. Mr. keaney noted that a 90-day comment period has started for the WPS
proposal Commissioner Cope indicated that the SCAS should obtain a copy of the
actual proposed changes to the rule, which is available on I 'PA s website, rather than
summary sheets. The SCAS can use the comment period to determine if the proposed
family farm exemption is adequately captured in the WPS and, if not. to propose
revisions.

Commissioner Larson noted the distinction between a "family farm." which can be
small or large and employ many people, and a "farm family," which refers to parents and
their children. A vole was taken on the motion ;o review the proposed WPS and

potentially insert additional language into the SCAS letter if greater clarification is
needed on the family farm exemption. The motion passed.

Mayor Pro tern Circo commented that urban farming has become very popular in
Kansas City, including large parcels that employ workers. She asked if the WPS affects

such farming or if the issue should be addressed as a wholly separate matter. Mr. Keaney
responded that community gardens are separate from commercial vegetable farming.
Mayor Pro tern Circo noted, however, that some gardens have fairly large productivity,
and she asked at whaJ. point urban gardening would no longer be defined as community
gardening. Mr. Keaney responded that the regulations define areas that are covered or
exempted and offeree to provide the materials to the SCAS.

Director (ioozaft-/ suited that all pesticides are regulated, and contain warnings about
proper use and so Ibrlh. Hnvironmental Justice advocates, who suppon community

gardening for healthier diets, arc attempting to make certain that even one understands
and follows the safety instructions when using pesticides.

fhc SCAS members aimed their attention lo two draft idlers from the Air. Climate and

Energy (ACE) Workgroup dated March 27, 2014. ft was agreed that members would read
the letters and be prepared to discuss the issues at the ACT Workgroup meeting.

State Representative Morris commented on the ACH letter regarding a New Source
Performance Standard (NSPS) for Residential Wood Heaters. Pe noted that one problem

with the NSPS is there are no mechanisms often to credit improving the environmental
performance of a practice. For example, some cities operate digesters as open systems,
evaporating sulfur and methane into the atmosphere; if they capture the emissions and

111 r a g g

-------
use them for energy, the systems become subject to regulations, with no credit for the
emission reductions achieved. The NSPS should recognize the concept of sustainabilily
and not punish local governments that adopt better practices. Commissioner Cope noted
thatNACo passed a resolution asking OP A to delay implementation of carbon pollution
regulations discussed in the second ACK letter until an economic analysis is completed. If
nobody car afford the electricity rates resulting from the power plant rules, that is
unsustainable.

VIII. SCAS Adjournment

Commissioner Cope urged SCAS members to solicit participation of communities with
populations of 10.000 or fewer, but potentially up to 20.000 or more. They do not have to
be I.CjAC members to participate in SCAS. A specific interest or expertise is the only
requirement. Commissioner Cope ncted that the minutes from the previous SCAS
meeting were certified and available. The motion by Executive Director Tiberi was
accepted and the meeting was adjourned.

Environmental Protection Agency
Local Government Advisory Committee
Spring 2014 Meeting
March 26,2014

MEETING PARTICIPANTS

EPA Representatives

Mark Rupp, Deputy Associate Administrator, OCIR
Frances Eargle, DFO, LGAC
Portia Banks, OCIR

Jack Bowles, Director, State and Local Government
OCIR

Becky Cook-Shyovitz, OCIR
Anita Cummings, OSWER

Joyce Frank, Principal Deputy Associate Administrator,
OCIR

Kellie Kubena, Office of Wastewater Management
(OWM)

Emma Zinsmeister, OCIR
Jim Home, OWM
Roger Gorke, OW

Allison Wiedeman, Office of the Administrator
Kevin Keaney, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention
Deborah Nagle, OW

Loren Denton, OECA

Also Present

Jennifer McCulley, The Scientific Consulting Group,
EPA Contractor

12 | P a g e

LGAC Members

Mayor Ralph Becker
Supervisor Salud Carbajal. Vice-Chair
Mayor Pro tem Cindy Circo
Commissioner Robert Cope
Mayor Bob Di.Xhon. Chair
Mayor Johnny DuPree
Councilor Jill Duson. iisq.

Mayor Karen Freeman-Wilson
Director Hector Gonzalez
Legislator Manna Jo Greene
Citj Manager Susan Hann
County Executive I on lliekrer
Mayor Elizabeth Kautz
Commissioner Don Larson
State Representative Jeff Moiris
Mayor Marilyn Vlurrell
Mayor Carolyn Peterson
Counci (member Dave Richins
Executive Director Kevin Sh;,fer
Executive Director Jeffrey Tineri
Mayor Lisa Wong

-------
If'e hereby certify that, in the he.st of our knmrieilge, the foregoing minutes are ticcurntc and complete.
Respectfully suhmitteil;

0 , "7

i	/

L

f'.'*" :a 		—-——	

Frances Eargle
Designated Federal Officer
Local Government Advisor) Committee
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

June, 18, 2014

Commissioner Robert Cope	Date

Chairman

Local Government Advisory Committee's
Small Community Advisor}' Subcommittee (SCAS)

? C JPi Jr

Date

S / -

13 I r: g O

-------

-------