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 linkThank you for the opportunity to comment on rulemaking for Wa...↓
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 linkStop making fuel so expensiveThank you for the opportunity to...↓ comment on rulemaking for Washington’s new cap-and-trade program.I urge you to adjust this costly new policy to help minimize the impacts on Washington families, small businesses and working people across our state.Studies estimate that this program could increase the cost to manufacture gasoline and diesel fuels by as much as 47 cents per gallon in 2023. (Cap and Trade Program Analysis, Washington Research Council, Memo on E2SSB 5126, June 6, 2022.)This is on top of record high fuel prices that consumers are already paying at the pump!Washingtonians are burdened enough right now with skyrocketing inflation and an economy that is still suffering the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gas prices in Washington state are already some of the highest in the nation.Please consider delaying the inclusion of gasoline and diesel fuel for at least the first few years – as California’s program did in order to delay the impacts on consumer fuels.Many experts believe the goals set by this program are too unrealistic. In order to meet its goals the program relies on a total ban of new gas, diesel and hybrid vehicles by 2035 – starting in 2026 with a requirement that 35% of new vehicles sold in Washington must be electric vehicles.Surveys show that a majority of Washington voters believe the state legislature needs to go back to the drawing board and revise the Cap-and-Trade program to make sure it will work as intended without placing such enormous cost burdens on Washington families and businesses. When it was first introduced, the state originally estimated that the Cap-and-Trade program would cost up to $500 million per year – which the state would spend on a variety of climate-related programs. Recent estimates indicate that the program could now cost up to 4 times more – close to $2 billion a year. (OFM Fiscal Note 2021, Ecology Preliminary Analysis, May 2022)Please do everything you can to reduce the costs of this new program to minimize burdens on Washington families and working people across our state.Thank you.Sincerely,Blain Robertsblainroberts@gmail.com11 S Arbor Rd, Aberdeen, WA 98520, USA
↓
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 linkThank you for the opportunity to comment on rulemaking for Wa...↓shington’s new cap-and-trade program.I urge you to adjust this costly new policy to help minimize the impacts on Washington families, small businesses and working people across our state.Studies estimate that this program could increase the cost to manufacture gasoline and diesel fuels by as much as 47 cents per gallon in 2023. (Cap and Trade Program Analysis, Washington Research Council, Memo on E2SSB 5126, June 6, 2022.)This is on top of record high fuel prices that consumers are already paying at the pump!Washingtonians are burdened enough right now with skyrocketing inflation and an economy that is still suffering the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gas prices in Washington state are already some of the highest in the nation.Please consider delaying the inclusion of gasoline and diesel fuel for at least the first few years – as California’s program did in order to delay the impacts on consumer fuels.Many experts believe the goals set by this program are too unrealistic. In order to meet its goals the program relies on a total ban of new gas, diesel and hybrid vehicles by 2035 – starting in 2026 with a requirement that 35% of new vehicles sold in Washington must be electric vehicles.Surveys show that a majority of Washington voters believe the state legislature needs to go back to the drawing board and revise the Cap-and-Trade program to make sure it will work as intended without placing such enormous cost burdens on Washington families and businesses. When it was first introduced, the state originally estimated that the Cap-and-Trade program would cost up to $500 million per year – which the state would spend on a variety of climate-related programs. Recent estimates indicate that the program could now cost up to 4 times more – close to $2 billion a year. (OFM Fiscal Note 2021, Ecology Preliminary Analysis, May 2022)Please do everything you can to reduce the costs of this new program to minimize burdens on Washington families and working people across our state.Thank you.Sincerely,Frank Vancefrank@mbelectricllc.com302 394th St S, Roy, WA 98580, USA
↓
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 linkStop this senselessThank you for the opportunity to comment o...↓n rulemaking for Washington’s new cap-and-trade program.I urge you to adjust this costly new policy to help minimize the impacts on Washington families, small businesses and working people across our state.Studies estimate that this program could increase the cost to manufacture gasoline and diesel fuels by as much as 47 cents per gallon in 2023. (Cap and Trade Program Analysis, Washington Research Council, Memo on E2SSB 5126, June 6, 2022.)This is on top of record high fuel prices that consumers are already paying at the pump!Washingtonians are burdened enough right now with skyrocketing inflation and an economy that is still suffering the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gas prices in Washington state are already some of the highest in the nation.Please consider delaying the inclusion of gasoline and diesel fuel for at least the first few years – as California’s program did in order to delay the impacts on consumer fuels.Many experts believe the goals set by this program are too unrealistic. In order to meet its goals the program relies on a total ban of new gas, diesel and hybrid vehicles by 2035 – starting in 2026 with a requirement that 35% of new vehicles sold in Washington must be electric vehicles.Surveys show that a majority of Washington voters believe the state legislature needs to go back to the drawing board and revise the Cap-and-Trade program to make sure it will work as intended without placing such enormous cost burdens on Washington families and businesses. When it was first introduced, the state originally estimated that the Cap-and-Trade program would cost up to $500 million per year – which the state would spend on a variety of climate-related programs. Recent estimates indicate that the program could now cost up to 4 times more – close to $2 billion a year. (OFM Fiscal Note 2021, Ecology Preliminary Analysis, May 2022)Please do everything you can to reduce the costs of this new program to minimize burdens on Washington families and working people across our state.Thank you.Sincerely,Bradley ParrishParriba@hotmail.com235 Washington Pl, Electric City, WA 99123, USA
↓
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 linkAs a retiree even though I may not have to travel to work eve...↓ry day, I still feel the crunch of high gas prices on my fixed income. I have doctor visits and errands that require me to use my car. The high gas prices have also affected the prices I pay at the grocery store limiting how much I can purchase.Thank you for the opportunity to comment on rulemaking for Washington’s new cap-and-trade program.I urge you to adjust this costly new policy to help minimize the impacts on Washington families, small businesses and working people across our state.Studies estimate that this program could increase the cost to manufacture gasoline and diesel fuels by as much as 47 cents per gallon in 2023. (Cap and Trade Program Analysis, Washington Research Council, Memo on E2SSB 5126, June 6, 2022.)This is on top of record high fuel prices that consumers are already paying at the pump!Washingtonians are burdened enough right now with skyrocketing inflation and an economy that is still suffering the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gas prices in Washington state are already some of the highest in the nation.Please consider delaying the inclusion of gasoline and diesel fuel for at least the first few years – as California’s program did in order to delay the impacts on consumer fuels.Many experts believe the goals set by this program are too unrealistic. In order to meet its goals the program relies on a total ban of new gas, diesel and hybrid vehicles by 2035 – starting in 2026 with a requirement that 35% of new vehicles sold in Washington must be electric vehicles.Surveys show that a majority of Washington voters believe the state legislature needs to go back to the drawing board and revise the Cap-and-Trade program to make sure it will work as intended without placing such enormous cost burdens on Washington families and businesses. When it was first introduced, the state originally estimated that the Cap-and-Trade program would cost up to $500 million per year – which the state would spend on a variety of climate-related programs. Recent estimates indicate that the program could now cost up to 4 times more – close to $2 billion a year. (OFM Fiscal Note 2021, Ecology Preliminary Analysis, May 2022)Please do everything you can to reduce the costs of this new program to minimize burdens on Washington families and working people across our state.Thank you.Sincerely,Lori Wilkinsonhardkey21@gmail.com5415 209th St E, Spanaway, WA 98387, USA
↓
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 linkThank you for the opportunity to comment on rulemaking for Wa...↓shington’s new cap-and-trade program.I urge you to adjust this costly new policy to help minimize the impacts on Washington families, small businesses and working people across our state.Studies estimate that this program could increase the cost to manufacture gasoline and diesel fuels by as much as 47 cents per gallon in 2023. (Cap and Trade Program Analysis, Washington Research Council, Memo on E2SSB 5126, June 6, 2022.)This is on top of record high fuel prices that consumers are already paying at the pump!Washingtonians are burdened enough right now with skyrocketing inflation and an economy that is still suffering the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gas prices in Washington state are already some of the highest in the nation.Please consider delaying the inclusion of gasoline and diesel fuel for at least the first few years – as California’s program did in order to delay the impacts on consumer fuels.Many experts believe the goals set by this program are too unrealistic. In order to meet its goals the program relies on a total ban of new gas, diesel and hybrid vehicles by 2035 – starting in 2026 with a requirement that 35% of new vehicles sold in Washington must be electric vehicles.Surveys show that a majority of Washington voters believe the state legislature needs to go back to the drawing board and revise the Cap-and-Trade program to make sure it will work as intended without placing such enormous cost burdens on Washington families and businesses. When it was first introduced, the state originally estimated that the Cap-and-Trade program would cost up to $500 million per year – which the state would spend on a variety of climate-related programs. Recent estimates indicate that the program could now cost up to 4 times more – close to $2 billion a year. (OFM Fiscal Note 2021, Ecology Preliminary Analysis, May 2022)Please do everything you can to reduce the costs of this new program to minimize burdens on Washington families and working people across our state.Thank you.Sincerely,Robin Johansenjobro60@msn.com4004 Padden Hills Ct, Bellingham, WA 98229, USA
↓
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 linkWe just set a 40 year record as a country for inflation. Any ...↓plan (no matter how important or not) that increases fuel costs is impratical. Continuing to artificially drive up the cost of energy right now could very well collapse the economy. An immediate problem much more dramatic for Washingtonians than any pending climate concerns. It does not matter how drastic or urgent you think the climate concerns are, if there are no jobs, and no money, there will be no revenue. If there are no jobs, and no income, no climate policies get funded. Think harder, do better.Thank you for the opportunity to comment on rulemaking for Washington’s new cap-and-trade program.I urge you to adjust this costly new policy to help minimize the impacts on Washington families, small businesses and working people across our state.Studies estimate that this program could increase the cost to manufacture gasoline and diesel fuels by as much as 47 cents per gallon in 2023. (Cap and Trade Program Analysis, Washington Research Council, Memo on E2SSB 5126, June 6, 2022.)This is on top of record high fuel prices that consumers are already paying at the pump!Washingtonians are burdened enough right now with skyrocketing inflation and an economy that is still suffering the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gas prices in Washington state are already some of the highest in the nation.Please consider delaying the inclusion of gasoline and diesel fuel for at least the first few years – as California’s program did in order to delay the impacts on consumer fuels.Many experts believe the goals set by this program are too unrealistic. In order to meet its goals the program relies on a total ban of new gas, diesel and hybrid vehicles by 2035 – starting in 2026 with a requirement that 35% of new vehicles sold in Washington must be electric vehicles.Surveys show that a majority of Washington voters believe the state legislature needs to go back to the drawing board and revise the Cap-and-Trade program to make sure it will work as intended without placing such enormous cost burdens on Washington families and businesses. When it was first introduced, the state originally estimated that the Cap-and-Trade program would cost up to $500 million per year – which the state would spend on a variety of climate-related programs. Recent estimates indicate that the program could now cost up to 4 times more – close to $2 billion a year. (OFM Fiscal Note 2021, Ecology Preliminary Analysis, May 2022)Please do everything you can to reduce the costs of this new program to minimize burdens on Washington families and working people across our state.Thank you.Sincerely,Robert Tutorrob.tutor@outlook.com647 SW Miller Rd, Port Orchard, WA 98367, USA
↓
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 linkWe cannot afford the increase in fuel cost that this ill thou...↓ght out and likely ineffective ‘feel good’ greenwashing bill will produce.Thank you for the opportunity to comment on rulemaking for Washington’s new cap-and-trade program.I urge you to adjust this costly new policy to help minimize the impacts on Washington families, small businesses and working people across our state.Studies estimate that this program could increase the cost to manufacture gasoline and diesel fuels by as much as 47 cents per gallon in 2023. (Cap and Trade Program Analysis, Washington Research Council, Memo on E2SSB 5126, June 6, 2022.)This is on top of record high fuel prices that consumers are already paying at the pump!Washingtonians are burdened enough right now with skyrocketing inflation and an economy that is still suffering the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gas prices in Washington state are already some of the highest in the nation.Please consider delaying the inclusion of gasoline and diesel fuel for at least the first few years – as California’s program did in order to delay the impacts on consumer fuels.Many experts believe the goals set by this program are too unrealistic. In order to meet its goals the program relies on a total ban of new gas, diesel and hybrid vehicles by 2035 – starting in 2026 with a requirement that 35% of new vehicles sold in Washington must be electric vehicles.Surveys show that a majority of Washington voters believe the state legislature needs to go back to the drawing board and revise the Cap-and-Trade program to make sure it will work as intended without placing such enormous cost burdens on Washington families and businesses. When it was first introduced, the state originally estimated that the Cap-and-Trade program would cost up to $500 million per year – which the state would spend on a variety of climate-related programs. Recent estimates indicate that the program could now cost up to 4 times more – close to $2 billion a year. (OFM Fiscal Note 2021, Ecology Preliminary Analysis, May 2022)Please do everything you can to reduce the costs of this new program to minimize burdens on Washington families and working people across our state.Thank you.Sincerely,Gary Oakesgs941vette@gmail.com2204 Camas Cir SE, Renton, WA 98055, USA
↓
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 linkAt a time when gasoline prices are out of sight, I can’t beli...↓eve that a tax increase would even be concerned.Thank you for the opportunity to comment on rulemaking for Washington’s new cap-and-trade program.I urge you to adjust this costly new policy to help minimize the impacts on Washington families, small businesses and working people across our state.Studies estimate that this program could increase the cost to manufacture gasoline and diesel fuels by as much as 47 cents per gallon in 2023. (Cap and Trade Program Analysis, Washington Research Council, Memo on E2SSB 5126, June 6, 2022.)This is on top of record high fuel prices that consumers are already paying at the pump!Washingtonians are burdened enough right now with skyrocketing inflation and an economy that is still suffering the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gas prices in Washington state are already some of the highest in the nation.Please consider delaying the inclusion of gasoline and diesel fuel for at least the first few years – as California’s program did in order to delay the impacts on consumer fuels.Many experts believe the goals set by this program are too unrealistic. In order to meet its goals the program relies on a total ban of new gas, diesel and hybrid vehicles by 2035 – starting in 2026 with a requirement that 35% of new vehicles sold in Washington must be electric vehicles.Surveys show that a majority of Washington voters believe the state legislature needs to go back to the drawing board and revise the Cap-and-Trade program to make sure it will work as intended without placing such enormous cost burdens on Washington families and businesses. When it was first introduced, the state originally estimated that the Cap-and-Trade program would cost up to $500 million per year – which the state would spend on a variety of climate-related programs. Recent estimates indicate that the program could now cost up to 4 times more – close to $2 billion a year. (OFM Fiscal Note 2021, Ecology Preliminary Analysis, May 2022)Please do everything you can to reduce the costs of this new program to minimize burdens on Washington families and working people across our state.Thank you.Sincerely,Michael Dalrymplemndalrymple@comcast.net6731 187th St SE, Snohomish, WA 98296, USA
↓
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, Gary Brill 13000 Linden Ave NSeattle, WA 98133
↓
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, LIESL MCWHORTER 13701 NE 171st StWoodinville, WA 98072
↓
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, J Chu 4110 NE 15th AveVancouver, WA 98663
↓
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 Babbitt 3008 E Howell StSeattle, WA 98122
↓
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, Mark Canright 11589 Martin RdRockport, WA 98283
↓
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, Carlie Stowe 172 Alderwood DrChehalis, WA 98532
↓
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, bernardo mujica 133 Sioux StSioux City, IA 51103
↓
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, Azalea Hermann 6517 41st Ave SWSeattle, 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, A.L. Steiner 1299 Cornwallville RdCornwallville, NY 12418
↓
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.I like everything in this template. I want to add what I learned from my friend in CA. He told me about "regulatory capture." We cannot let fossil fuel companies to regulate their own industry. Also, I hope we are not burning wood or other biofuels as a source of energy. That's not a real solution. I am also worried about money being spent in unproven carbon capture and storage technologyies. We do not have time for that. 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, Marty Bishop 1867 Miracle Mile Dr 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, Devon Kellogg 17926 NE 101st CtRedmond, WA 98052
↓
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, Giles Sydnor 5355 28th Ave NWSeattle, 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, Tracy Wang 5355 28th Ave NWSeattle, 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, John Barger 7752 SE 44th AvePortland, OR 97206
↓
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, Janice Gloe 3100 Guido StOakland, CA 94602
↓
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. As a father, family doctor, and person of faith, wanting to pass along a healthy climate for our children, I urge you to implement the strongest possible health and climate protections in this Act, as follows below. 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 Covert-Bowlds 523 N 84th StSeattle, 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, Mariana Castillo 361 Crockett StSeattle, WA 98109
↓
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 Neary 22608 115th Pl SEKent, WA 98031
↓
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, Alana Khayat 4108 46th Ave SWSeattle, WA 98116
↓
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 Rehrmann 2233 38th Pl ESeattle, WA 98112
↓
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, Barbara Scavezze 13268 NE 182nd StWoodinville, WA 98072
↓
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, jason husby 3531 N 3rd StMinneapolis, MN 55412
↓
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, Jacqueline holly 4637 Temescal Canyon RdCorona, CA 92883
↓
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-and-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 that 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) whether 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. - Utilize the best available technology. Require that 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 Edmison 11820 167th Pl NERedmond, WA 98052
↓
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, Michele Villeneuve 2056 Sharron RdKingsport, TN 37660
↓
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, Alixandre Wilkins 4800 Rosedale St NWGig Harbor, WA 98335
↓
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 Cummings 8105 NE Fourth Plain BlvdVancouver, 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, Susan Porter 2134 Hemlock Farms RdHawley, PA 18428
↓
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, Melvin Cheitlin 1661 Pine StSan Francisco, CA 94109
↓
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, Nelson Molina 8157 Cyclamen WayBuena Park, CA 90620
↓
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, Lynn Stiglich 4214 NE 136th CirVancouver, WA 98686
↓
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, Timothy Duda 340 Queen Anne CtSan Antonio, TX 78209
↓
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 Ring-Revotskie 14 Bedford CoveSan Rafael, CA 94901
↓
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, Gregory Denton 5600 Kirkwood Pl 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, Tia Pearson 115 Lehua StWahiawa, HI 96786
↓
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 McKay 1818 Main StLynden, WA 98264
↓
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, MARLES BLACKBIRD 1125 12th Ave SEOlympia, 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, Craig Swanson 16220 SE 28th PlBellevue, WA 98008
↓
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, Evelyn Bittner 10710 Whitman Ave NSeattle, WA 98133
↓
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 kolb 104 Paradise LnGranite Falls, WA 98252
↓
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, Martin Watts 15 Moira CresCoogee, Nsw 2034
↓
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, Lindsay Stares 19825 132nd Pl 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, keren Kumar 4202 Homestead BlvdWestborough, MA 01581
↓
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, Rama Paruchuri 2245 Glencoe Hills DrAnn Arbor, MI 48108
↓
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. As a Washington resident, and especially as a parent, I am deeply invested in the future of this community. As others have stated, 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, Alaina Moon 2122 Swanee Pl SEOlympia, 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, Tyler Otto 23901 SE 241st StMaple Valley, WA 98038
↓
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, Mark Leed 3419 E 21st StVancouver, WA 98661
↓
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, Michele Nihipali 54-074 Kamehameha HwyHauula, HI 96717
↓
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 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.The Climate Commitment Act is the strongest carbon pricing program in the country, and we are hopeful 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. We appreciate the work that Ecology has undertaken to translate this far-reaching statute and faithfully implement its directives.Overall, we 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.We 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, Donald Wingard 3604 121st St Ct NWGig Harbor, WA 98332
↓
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, v l 129 Reserve CirOviedo, FL 32765
↓
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, Jan Ellis 72 Kruse 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, Christina Davis 26115 49th Ave Ct ESpanaway, WA 98387
↓
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, Matt Lennon 409 Ruby StEllensburg, WA 98926
↓
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, Andrea Gruszecki 19805 Sunnyside Dr NShoreline, WA 98133
↓
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, Rebecca Glass 18003 Stone Ave NShoreline, WA 98133
↓
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, Elena Rumiantseva 3807 West Lake Sammamish Pkwy NERedmond, WA 98052
↓
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, Denise Lytle 3207 Plaza DrWoodbridge Township, NJ 07095
↓
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, Gina Gatto 18755 Crest AveCastro Valley, CA 94546
↓
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 Falk 1010 State AveMarysville, WA 98270
↓
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 Haslag 878 W Pembrook AveNixa, MO 65714
↓
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 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, Marty Bishop 1867 Miracle Mile Dr 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, Karen Loeser 6247 82nd Ave SEMercer 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, Kathryn Jacobs 117 Eldorado PlChelan, WA 98816
↓
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 Pinc 6201 NE 80th 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, Michael Krall 587 N Fork RdLander, WY 82520
↓
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, Katherine Nelson 9445 S 232nd StKent, WA 98031
↓
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 Washington 345 W 58th StNew York, NY 10019
↓
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, Lois Eulberg 4730 US-97Peshastin, WA 98847
↓
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, Leonard Obert 15426 SE 116th StRenton, WA 98059
↓
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 Eisenberg 6 Upland RdBaltimore, MD 21210
↓
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, Patti Rader 120 S 295th PlFederal Way, WA 98003
↓
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, Susan Risser 1822 Wold RdFriday Harbor, WA 98250
↓
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, Andrew Wadsworth 125 W 33rd StReading, PA 19606
↓
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, William Golding 246 S Stadium WayTacoma, WA 98402
↓
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, Faith Franck 2629 Desert Glen DrLas Vegas, NV 89134
↓
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, dawn kenyon 54 Bump Hill RdGreenfield Center, NY 12833
↓
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, Mark Canright 11589 Martin RdRockport, WA 98283
↓
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, Rebecca Frank 3065 Monterey DrMalaga, WA 98828
↓
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, Dennis Ledden 183 Webb RdSequim, WA 98382
↓
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, Joanne Watchie 2440 Alki Ave SWSeattle, WA 98116
↓
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, Lau Doe 392 Nollwood LnBremerton, WA 98312
↓
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, colonel meyer 3701 Eagle Pass StNorth Port, FL 34286
↓
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, Josh Pelleg 5 Marganit StOmer, South District 84965
↓
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, Kirsten Schneider 318 NW 201st PlShoreline, WA 98177
↓
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 hipp 609 Rosette CtBellingham, WA 98226
↓
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, Geoffrey Richards 18731 9th Ave NEPoulsbo, WA 98370
↓
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, Beverly Antonio 317 Spaniard Neck RdCentreville, MD 21617
↓
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, Blake Wu 3600 Mt Diablo BlvdLafayette, CA 94549
↓
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, Lawrence Magliola 108 Hogans VistaSequim, WA 98382
↓
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, Sara Hoerlein 1242 E Racine StBellingham, WA 98229
↓
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, Steve Uyenishi 7301 40th Ave NESeattle, WA 98115
↓
No attachments
[
Previous Page
/
Next Page
]