MINUTES
Strategic Plan Work Group Call
March 6, 2003
Roll Call
Bob Saunders, WA
Rick Boddicker, SD
Bob Habeck and Trista Glazier, MT
Dana Mount and Tom Bachman, ND
Lee Alter, Pat Cummins, Tom Moore, WGA
Bob Gruenig and Bill Grantham, NTEC
Don Arkell, WESTAR
Overall Structure/Organization of the Plan
Moore – Provide more guidance (road map) to committees and forums, especially with respect to completing the contribution assessment and using that to refine control strategy “package” options. Arkell – This may help address his concerns about interacting with states and meeting their needs.
Cummins – Should emphasize our assumption about SIP due date of December 2007. In a worst case, SIPs could be due in December 2005. Alter – This is one reason the plan takes care to emphasize the minimal requirements of the rule, and why the timeline consists of two phases.
Saunders – Several of the topics under “Challenges” should be recharacterized as the direction or path of the WRAP as opposed to challenges just sitting out there, especially since we often describe how to navigate such challenges. These should be moved to the WRAP Process section, as should the timeline. Hence, there are few major sections, and one of these is the heart of the strategic plan (process, timeline, and much of what is currently called “challenges”).
Mount – Our process for dispute resolution should include WRAP border issues (CENRAP, Canada, and Mexico).
Habeck – Add a table of contents.
Saunders – Remove the two rectanges next to the figure with the overlapping circles, and their discussion in the text. Mount agrees.
Saunders – Clarify BART discussion on page 21 – i.e., “BART assessment”.
Saunders – Was concerned about statements to the effect that current control strategies may not be being fully implemented and/or that sources may not be aware of them, and that these conditions may not be of concern to the NAAQS SIPs.
Saunders – Delete sentence saying no process per se for resolving disagreements. There is a process being proposed albeit simple: talk, WRAP participates in talks and provides data, EPA ultimate arbitrator if agreement not reached. Habeck – Perhaps add the concept of “resolving at the lowest level.”