Rulemaking - Chapter 173-446 WAC, Climate Commitment Act Program
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Lezlie Ringland 999 E 1st Ave Unit 106 Unit 106Broomfield, CO 80020
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Carol Collins 1935 Nault RdDover, DE 19904
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,As a mother and a g...↓randmother, I am very concerned for the health and viability of the planet our children and future generations will inherit. We have a duty to our communities, families and most importantly, children to ensure their safety and well being through environmentally sound and sustainable policies, including clean air, water, addressing climate change, etc. That duty will always be more important than politics or profit.So thank you for the opportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Juli Kring 12400 Brookglade CirHouston, TX 77099
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Shary B 1950 Alaskan WaySeattle, WA 98101
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of your state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Jon Krueger 5843 Seymour RdJackson, MI 49201
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Paul Ferrari 7822 189th Pl SWEdmonds, WA 98026
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Nancy Peacock 2504 NE 117th StSeattle, WA 98125
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Patrick McKee 9233 SE 59th StMercer Island, WA 98040
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Doris Raspa 10500 NE 51st CirVancouver, WA 98682
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Valerie Krull 1627 Dickinson Ave NWOlympia, WA 98502
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Carrie Pilger 1232 159th Pl SWLynnwood, WA 98087
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on the Climate Commitment Act, the strongest carbon pricing program in the country. I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts on overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating the impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review the impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts on overburdened communities and tribal lands and treaty rights, b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage, and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no-cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no-cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and landowners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate the participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, David Tonkin 32 S Stromberg AvePort Townsend, WA 98368
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Jean Graas 8310 NE Meadows CtVancouver, WA 98662
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Paul Carver 2628 Furmint WayRancho Cordova, CA 95670
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Sean Fear 701 NW 54th StSeattle, WA 98107
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Georgia Carver 2628 Furmint WayRancho Cordova, CA 95670
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Melissa Rees 7707 E Beverly DrSpokane Valley, WA 99212
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Peter Mastenbroek 12323 NE 97th StKirkland, WA 98033
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Noel Barnes 1614 Glennwood Ave SERenton, WA 98058
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Amy Compestine 1410 S Bowdish RdSpokane Valley, WA 99206
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Kristen Severns 777 SW 19th CtOak Harbor, WA 98277
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Robert Zeller 35 W Hoffman AveLindenhurst, NY 11757
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Judith Anderson 1090 Robin StReno, NV 89509
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, d robinson 1 River StCurlew, WA 99118
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. We must not let the Supreme Court stop our climate progress!The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, John Cruz 8912 SE Hillcrest DrVancouver, WA 98664
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Scott Bishop 1710 Giles Ave NWOlympia, WA 98502
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Dean Onessimo 15420 82nd Terrace NWest Palm Beach, FL 33418
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Dana Catts 3920 SW 97th StSeattle, WA 98136
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Cathy KingChuparkoff 200 Minnesota AveSt. Cloud, FL 34769
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Annie McMahon 421 Geary Heights RdClarkdale, AZ 86324
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Barclay Hauber 160 Old Pollock RdPollock, ID 83547
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Diane Basile 7 Evert StHuntington Station, NY 11746
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, CARL OLSON 1971 Jackson Ave SEPort Orchard, WA 98366
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Sandy Covich 8508 116th St EPuyallup, WA 98373
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Michael Garten 3420 Burke Ave NSeattle, WA 98103
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Florie Rothenberg 3125 SW Raymond StSeattle, WA 98126
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Teresa Allen 6184 N Fork RdDeming, WA 98244
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Mary Platter-Rieger 2104 Crenshaw StSan Diego, CA 92105
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Stephani Noar 6067 Central AveAnacortes, WA 98221
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Laurie Denis 23 Boardman StSalem, MA 01970
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Don Worley 1949 WA-25Kettle Falls, WA 99141
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,I know what follows...↓ this is a form email, but I want to personally express how concerned and distressed Iam about global warming. Please value planetary health over corporate profits as you proceed. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Noel Allen 3610 Ashworth Ave NSeattle, WA 98103
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Jeffrey Green 2087 Tidepool Pl EPort Orchard, WA 98366
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Lorraine Martinez 251 James Gordon Outlaw RdIndian Mound, TN 37079
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, David Strauss 1601 2nd Ave WSeattle, WA 98119
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Forest Shomer 1322 Washington StPort Townsend, WA 98368
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Michael Brandes 2024 Cameron AveMerrick, NY 11566
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Robin Kory 110 Trout AveColorado Springs, CO 80906
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Traci Fairbanks 6000 SW Lake Helena RdPort Orchard, WA 98367
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Mike schutt 5087 Tee PlFreeland, WA 98249
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Joseph Lopez 1411 N Clogston WaySeattle, WA 98103
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Derek Gendvil 9030 W Sahara AveLas Vegas, NV 89117
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Wendy Fischer 14712 Prince John CtBurtonsville, MD 20866
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Kimberly Seger 11373 US-422Kittanning, PA 16201
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Vicki Basta 212 Alaskan Way SSeattle, WA 98104
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Keith D'Alessandro 42486 Saratoga RdCanton, MI 48187
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, James Brunton 12718 Forest Hills DrTampa, FL 33612
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Corrine Anderson-Ketchmark 506 S 222nd StDes Moines, WA 98198
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, TOM DEVINE 2002 Capitol Way SOlympia, WA 98501
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Donna Snow 2421 Chambers Lake LnLacey, WA 98503
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Betty McNiel 14224 SE 45th PlBellevue, WA 98006
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, PETER SEIDMAN 4643 John Luhr Rd NEOlympia, WA 98516
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Elizabeth Barats 1710 Donovan AveBellingham, WA 98225
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Charlie Burns 29 Van Buren AveNorwalk, CT 06850
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Emily Rothman 1112 San Pedro Dr NEAlbuquerque, NM 87110
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Chris Hawkins 15255 SE Fairwood BlvdRenton, WA 98058
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Angie Dixon 6949 Humphrey RdClinton, WA 98236
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, David Graves 7048 18th Ave NESeattle, WA 98115
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Javier Ortiz 7326 14th Ave NWSeattle, WA 98117
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Bridgett Heinly 4440 Brindisi StSan Diego, CA 92107
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Tracey Loyd 11500 Meridian Ave SEverett, WA 98208
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Arlene Dreste 2461 N Rosser RdAjo, AZ 85321
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Jeffrey Nosbaum 2801 Western AveSeattle, WA 98121
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Kevin Silvey 9263 78th PlSeminole, FL 33777
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Daniel Henling 1412 NW 61st StSeattle, WA 98107
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Thomas Kenison 16617 Marine View Dr SWBurien, WA 98166
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Sustainability is the possibility that humans and all life will flourish on Earth forever. Are you helping us at least have a possibility?Thank you, Dennis Gawlik 14050 Running Springs Pl NEBainbridge Island, WA 98110
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Tom Craighead 28203 137th Ave SWVashon, WA 98070
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Brian Gibbons 19510 Lorain RdFairview Park, OH 44126
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Christina Manetti 6925 Hillgrove Ln SWLakewood, WA 98499
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Merlin Wilson 23 Harrington CirSalinas, CA 93906
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Norman Sandel 135 Beacon Valley RdBeacon Falls, CT 06403
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Linda Wasserman 1510 N Steele StTacoma, WA 98406
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, MLou Christ Dayton Ave NSeattle, WA 98103
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Marjorie Millner 1107 NW 137th StVancouver, WA 98685
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Russell Ziegler 22 61st StDowners Grove, IL 60516
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Hillary Tiefer 5007 SW Canterbury LnPortland, OR 97219
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Sally Hurst 3303 Cascadia Ave SSeattle, WA 98144
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Caroline Sévilla 400 N Michigan AveChicago, IL 60611
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Phyllis Hatfield 2239 Fairview Ave ESeattle, WA 98102
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Gail Atkins 6299 Wilson Creek RdRaymond, WA 98577
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Lacey Hicks 4463 Hyde CommonFremont, CA 94538
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Alisa Dunn 1075 Fox Run RdMilford, OH 45150
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Jamie Shields 15739 NW Rondos DrPortland, OR 97229
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Vicki Kastlie 4457 Muir AveSan Diego, CA 92107
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Nancy Peters 11008 NE 68th StKirkland, WA 98033
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Carole H 4807 Willamette StPort Townsend, WA 98368
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, Mary Lambert 402 Pleasant StMarlborough, MA 01752
↓
No attachments
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND were expecting the attachment or the linkDear Mr. Joshua Grice WA Dept. of Ecology,Thank you for the o...↓pportunity to comment on this critical rule that will shape implementation of our state’s cap & invest program. The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and I am excited about its potential to reduce carbon, grow the economy, and invest in overburdened communities. The state legislature intentionally integrated environmental justice, tribal sovereignty, and tools to address environmental impacts into the structure of the law. I appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.The program rules are important to get right so that Ecology has the clear authority to act, the responsibilities of covered entities are clear, and the people of Washington have clarity on this program. Overall, I support the general direction of the proposed rule and urge Ecology to strengthen it in the following ways:Overburdened communities and environmental harm:- Articulate Ecology’s responsibility to ensure the cap-and-invest program avoids negative impacts to overburdened communities and describe how information will be gathered and used to fulfill that responsibility.- Clarify Ecology’s role in evaluating impacts of all Emission-Intensive Trade-Exposed facilities (EITEs) on overburdened communities, regardless of when each facility becomes a covered entity.- Establish an explicit process to review impacts of program implementation on outcomes relative to overburdened communities, in order to inform Ecology’s mandatory reporting to the legislature required by RCW 70A.65.060(5). The rule must provide information sufficient to conduct a meaningful and thorough review. This process should be separate from the “Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities” initiative, be inclusive of the full range of overburdened communities as defined by the law, and focus on disparities of impacts across the entire program.Tribal Sovereignty:- Explicitly incorporate Ecology’s existing obligation to proactively engage and consult with federally recognized tribes.Information to enable review and accountability:- Require all covered entities to provide information about: a) their impacts to overburdened communities and to tribal lands and treaty rights; b) the chemicals and pollutants they process and/or manage; and c) if there are any violations under any permits they hold.- Provide guidance and establish reporting requirements for consumer-owned utilities on the use of the value of no cost allowances and engage with the UTC on its regulation of investor-owned utilities’ use of the value of no cost allowances. - Best available technology: Require EITEs applying for an upward adjustment of no cost allowances to submit information on any excessive environmental impacts of the fuels, processes, and equipment used by each facility. The rule should be clear that if the facility is found to create excessive environmental impacts, upward adjustments should be denied.- Establish requirements for Ecology to publicly share and document data being used to establish baseline information, subtotal baselines, and allocations. Environmental Justice Council:- Include explicit language describing how Ecology will engage with the Environmental Justice Council in the development, implementation, and evaluation of the full program.- Track information about the environmental and health impacts of all covered entities to inform Council review. Offsets:- Establish a process for future modification of offset protocols, including: 1) Adaptation of existing carbon offset protocols in response to lessons learned in California and Washington. For example, updating the existing Urban Forestry Protocol, which is not currently implementable, to provide benefits in urban communities hardest hit by facilities and pollution; and 2) Creation of new protocols to harness climate mitigation potential of other ecosystems and land uses, such as blue carbon or agriculture.- Provide mechanisms for aggregation of landowners who would otherwise face barriers to participation in carbon offsets—particularly Tribal Nations and small forest landowners— in order to maximize benefits to local communities, tribes, and land owners of all sizes.- Clarify the process for reducing offset limits in response to cumulative air pollution burden in overburdened communities, including how data will be gathered and shared.- It is critical that offset rules are guided by feedback from Tribal Nations, designed to facilitate participation of tribal nations, and support tribal sovereignty.I look forward to Ecology’s ongoing work to strengthen and finalize this rule as part of our state’s work to meet our climate goals in an equitable and just way.Thank you, David Habib 555 5th Ave WKirkland, WA 98033
↓
No attachments
[
Previous Page
/
Next Page
]