Citizen's Environmental Quality Committee

Oct. 2, 2023 Citizens Environmental Quality Committee Winona, Minnesota 55987 Dear Committee Members: The next meeting of the Citizens Environmental Quality Committee meeting will be held on Thursday, Oct. 5th, 2023 at 4:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at City Hall. 1. Call to Order 2. Review of Sept. Meeting Minutes 3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Cumulative Impacts Discussion 4. Other Business 5. Adjournment Sincerely, John Howard Natural Resources Sustainability Coordinator CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DATE: Thursday Sept. 7, 2023 TIME: Scheduled for 4:30 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers PRESENT: Sadie Neuman, Dan Hall, Paul Schmitt, and David Ruff GUESTS: STAFF: John Howard 1. Call to Order: Call to order at 4:34 PM by Dan Hall. 2. AmeriCorps Introduction: Tabled, as new member was unable to attend this evening. Her name is Rebecca Modlin, and has a strong interest in native plants. Dan asked if this was a tree position, and John responded that yes, this is a Community Forestry Corps position. 3. Review and Approval of August 2023 Meeting Minutes: Motion by Sadie, second by Paul. Approved unanimously. 4. ECO Act Comment: John said that the CEQC’s recommendations were relayed to the coalition of cities preparing a comment letter. Two of three points raised by the CEQC were incorporated into the letter, specifically about including pedal bikes in addition to e-bikes for rebates, and developing programs to include renters in energy savings. The point of sale rebate recommendation by the CEQC, and rebate structure in general, was not part of the comment letter. Only 7 entities provided comments to Xcel, so John was glad the City participated. Xcel Energy addressed a number of the points raised in the city coalition letter, so it is clear they read the comment letter. Xcel Energy does not believe pedal bikes are an allowable use of the funding per state statute, but John disagrees, so will be filing a reply comment. Sadie asked about how the City became involved with the city coalition given that most are in the Twin Cities. Winona is grouped with these cities since we all have Xcel Energy for both electricity and natural gas service. All the participants were approached by CEE, but John does not know exactly why CEE reached out to the City of Winona. His best guess was because of the City’s involvement in Partners in Energy with Xcel Energy. Sadie is glad the City is participating with larger cities. Paul found it interesting that pedal bikes are referred to as “acoustic” bikes in the letter. John said that is the term the coalition decided to use, and apparently is a common term of art in the bike industry. John will let the CEQC know of any developments. John is impressed that Winona may be the only City whose environmental advisory committee weighed in on the Triennial ECO Act Plan. Sadie thanked City staff for making this possible. 5. Electricity Sources: At the August meeting, the CEQC discussed which sources are used for local electricity. John compiled Xcel Energy data and noticed that renewable energy has greatly grown in the last 5 years. In the last year of data, wind energy was the largest energy source. Dan had seen information indicating about 30% renewable and 70% fossil when he looked earlier this summer, but that may be old data. The Xcel information shows those numbers are reversed. Paul asked if this data was statewide, and John replied it was for the Xcel footprint in Minnesota. Paul was interested in the infographic on car lifecycle emissions that Sadie found. Mining impacts on the environment aren’t captured, but still puts the energy in perspective. Sadie said a WSU professor is very knowledgeable on minerals and energy. Dan shared about the juxtaposition of environmental art and the materials needed to create it currently at the Minnesota Marine Art Museum. Sadie asked about solar coops. John was not very familiar with that term, but there is community solar in the area. Paul shared about his experience as a community solar subscriber. In this arrangement, solar goes on the grid, and the homeowner gets a credit. Xcel Energy is mandated to participate. Sadie asked if Xcel Energy claims the solar as part of their mix? John said yes, that the renewable credits are usually sold to Xcel. However, Xcel’s WindSource and Renewable*Connect do not use their credits, so customers can claim the renewable energy status. Sadie asked about Xcel having solar farms of their own? John said they do, but it is usually added to the general grid mix. 6. CDP Report: John provided a brief description of the CDP program that the City participates in. The 2022 submission did not get a very good rating. Sadie asked if this score is auto generated, or how it was determined. John is not sure, nor does he know why the score last year was lower than previous years since the submission was very similar. Sadie asked how the data was assembled, as it looks extensive. John said the data is pulled from a variety of sources, and some is carried over from previous years. Sadie asked about the report card from CDP and whether it has good infographics or other usable information. John isn’t sure how the report card looks other than the grade. CDP’s goals seem to be an accountability program and peer learning. Paul asked about food system scoring and food resilience through CDP, or any learnings from other cities. John feels this is part of the climate risk section, but is not completely sure. Sadie relayed her experience at the University of Indiana with food security and waste. This includes some small food plots on the university and working with the food catering company to donate excess food. Sadie is surprised WSU hasn’t done more with Chartwells, it is an opportunity for improvement. The CEQC appreciates the staff work on the application. Dan asked about this year’s score – John said it would be a couple months until he knows how the score turns out. Dan shared his experience with quality surveys, and how they often require written plans to get good scores. Sadie voiced support for the City setting policies. Dan said this is coming along in the Comprehensive Plan. Sadie specifically asked about a climate risk and mitigation plan, as this is stated as being in progress in the CDP application. This is also a new FEMA requirement for some funding/grants. John clarified that the in- progress sustainability plan will have a section on climate risk and vulnerabilities, although there is still much more work that can be done on this topic. David asked about the County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan and whether that addresses climate impacts. John said the County plan covers the City, but is not very climate focused. David wondered if FEMA funding could be used for developing a climate plan. Sadie feels the work  put into the CDP submission could be a good start to a climate plan. Sadie noted that the access to education was good, but funding was lacking for Winona work. David asked if CDP provided feedback or recommendations as part of their latest report card? John did not recall seeing that in the score card, but knows they offer the opportunity to get personalized feedback on the scoring. Sadie asked if the City Council had seen the CDP report? John said no, he has not presented or shared it with the City Council. He worries it is a lot of information that would be difficult to cover during a Council session. 7. Other Business: John reminded the CEQC that the ReCharge electric vehicle event is coming up on Sat. Sept. 16th. People are welcome to attend and/or volunteer. John asked about renewing the terms of CEQC members whose terms expire. Everyone is interested in continuing serving on the CEQC. David asked about bonding funding for the water treatment. John said the big ask is for a phosphorus reduction project at the waste water treatment plant. David suggested looking into the revolving fund of the Clean Water Fund, as this can apply to non-point sources. 8. Adjournment: Adjournment motion by Paul, second by David. Adjourn at 5:22 pm. Notes prepared by John Howard.  CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 3. MPCA Cumulative Impacts Rule PREPARED BY: John Howard DATE: Oct. 5, 2023 The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is accepting comments as it begins a rule making process for the new state cumulative impacts law. This rule is focused on MPCA air permitted facilities within one mile of environmental justice areas in the 7 county Twin Cities area as well as Duluth and Rochester. Member Neuman asked that the CEQC consider this topic, and the absence of greater Minnesota in the rule scoping. Attached for information is the request for comment issued by the MPCA. Link to MPCA webpage on this topic: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/get-engaged/cumulative- impacts Minnesota Pollution Control Agency REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Planned New Rules Governing Cumulative Impacts Analysis for Permit Decisions in Environmental Justice Areas, Minnesota Rules, chapter 7001; Revisor’s ID Number R04805 Overview. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is requesting comments on legislatively mandated amendments to air rules, Minnesota Rules, ch. 7001. This rulemaking project is referred to as the Cumulative Impacts Analysis Rule. The MPCA is required to undertake this rulemaking to comply with Laws of Minnesota 2023, chapter 60, article 8, section 3, and the scope of this rulemaking is limited to that purpose. The MPCA is planning to amend the listed rule chapter and requests comments on the proposed amendments from affected or interested parties. See the Comments and MPCA Contact Person sections of this notice for information on how to submit comments. This request for comments (RFC) is the MPCA’s legal notice of its intent to begin rulemaking. This is the first of several opportunities for public comment and input on this rulemaking. At this stage, we do not have a draft rule; we want your feedback to inform us about the ideas described under the Subject of Rules section. If you have ideas related to this rulemaking that we need to consider, please submit them in writing. Submitting your ideas and information at this early stage in rulemaking allows us more time to address issues that may come up and helps to ensure informed decision-making on our part. If the proposed rules affect you in any way, the MPCA encourages you to participate in the rulemaking process. View the Alternative Format/Accommodation and MPCA Contact Person sections of this notice for information on requesting this document in an alternative format. Subject of Rules. The MPCA requests comments on the development of new rules governing cumulative impacts analysis for permit decisions in environmental justice (EJ) areas. The MPCA will develop rules that involve the expansion of cumulative impacts analysis for air permit projects. Many issues are outlined, and many definitions are already defined in the legislation, and the MPCA is seeking comment on various parts of a future rule. As required by statute, the rules would apply to: (a) This section applies to an application for a permit by a facility that: (1) is located in or within one mile of a census tract that is part of an EJ area; and (2) is located: (i) in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, or Washington; or (ii) in a city of the first class. (b) The commissioner must enter into consultation, consistent with section 10.65, regarding the application of this section to permit applications located in Indian Country. After consultation, the Tribal government with jurisdiction over the applicable EJ area may elect that the facility seeking the permit action be subject to this section and must so notify the commissioner in writing. aq-rule2-25a  Some people have exposure to more or multiple kinds of pollution. Some people are more vulnerable to the health impacts of pollution. These groups of people may be more severely affected by air pollution, and many may live in identified EJ areas.1 Information from cumulative impacts analysis can help the MPCA identify what these impacts are, how they affect people, and what the MPCA can do to help mitigate these effects. This is an initial RFC, and the elements of this rulemaking may change based on comments received or other information. This rulemaking is needed to enact the cumulative impacts analysis requirements as directed by Minnesota Session Law 2023, which include rules that will: 1) Establish benchmarks to assist the Commissioner's determination regarding the need for a cumulative impacts analysis. 2) Establish the required content of a cumulative impacts analysis and provide sources of public information that an applicant can access regarding environmental stressors present in an EJ area. 3) Define conditions, criteria, or circumstances that establish an environmental or health impact as a substantial adverse impact. 4) Establish the content of a community benefit agreement and procedures for entering into community benefit agreements, which must include: i) active outreach to residents of the affected EJ area designed to achieve significant community participation; ii) considerations other than or in addition to economic considerations, but with priority given to considerations that directly impact the residents of the EJ area; and iii) at least one public meeting held within the affected EJ area. 5) Establish a petition process and form to be submitted to the agency by EJ area residents to support the need for a cumulative impact analysis. 6) Establish a process through consultation as defined in MN Statute 10.65 by which a Tribal government can elect to apply this section to a permit application. 7) Establish methods for holding public meetings and handling public comments. In addition, the MPCA encourages comments on the development of an engagement process that actively incorporates input from community and stakeholders during the cumulative impact analysis rulemaking development, including but not limited to establishing the community benefit agreement and petition processes. MPCA welcomes all other relevant comment on cumulative impacts analysis. Parties Affected. The new rules would be most likely to affect residents of EJ areas as defined by the legislation in as well as potential permit applicants in those areas. The MPCA plans to convene a stakeholder and community engagement process throughout the rule development process, beginning with this notice and public information sessions to be held in September 2023 in affected areas (dates and locations to come at https://www.pca.state.mn.us/get- 1 https://www.pca.state.mn.us/about-mpca/mpca-and-environmental-justice This tool will be updated to reflect the statutory definition. 2 engaged/cumulative-impacts). All engagement opportunities will conform with the notice requirements in the statute. The MPCA encourages comments on how to develop an engagement process that actively incorporates input from community and stakeholders. The MPCA does not anticipate that the rules will require a local government to adopt or amend an ordinance or other regulation under Minnesota Statutes section, 14.128. Local governments may submit written information to the contrary. The MPCA also requests any information pertaining to the cumulative effect of the rule amendments with other federal and state regulations related to the specific purpose of the rule. Cumulative effect means the impact that results from incremental effects of the proposed rule in addition to other rules, regardless of what state or federal agency has adopted the other rules. Comments. Interested parties may submit written comments or information on these possible rules until 4:30 p.m. on Friday, October 6, 2023. During the public comment period associated with this RFC, submit written comments or information to the: 1) Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) Rulemaking eComments website at https://minnesotaoah.granicusideas.com; or 2) OAH attn: William Moore, 600 North Robert Street, P.O. Box 64620, St. Paul, MN 55164-0620 or fax 651-539-0310. You may view frequently asked questions about the OAH Rulemaking eComments website at https://mn.gov/oah/assets/ecomments-faq_tcm19-82012.pdf. Any questions about submitting comments via the Rulemaking eComments website should be directed to William Moore of the OAH at 651-361-7900 or by email at William.T.Moore@state.mn.us; please note that you may not submit rulemaking comments by phone or email. Comments received are public and will be available for review at the OAH Rulemaking eComments website at https://minnesotaoah.granicusideas.com/discussions and at the OAH, 600 North Robert Street, P.O. Box 64620, St. Paul, MN 55164-0620. NOTE: The MPCA will carefully consider all comments received in response to this RFC. However, these comments will not necessarily be included in the formal rulemaking record submitted to the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) if and when a proceeding to adopt rules is started. The MPCA is required to submit to the ALJ only the written comments received in response to the draft rules after they are proposed with a Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules. If you submit comments during the RFC stage of rule development and want to ensure that the ALJ reviews them, you should resubmit your comments after the rules are formally proposed with a Notice of Intent. The MPCA will not publish a Notice of Intent for this project until more than 60 days have elapsed from the date of this RFC. MPCA Contact Person. The MPCA contact person is Rule Coordinator Katie Izzo at the MPCA, 520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; email katie.izzo@state.mn.us; telephone 651-757- 2595. You may also call the MPCA at 651-296-6300 or 1-800-657-3864; use your preferred relay service. Again, please note that you may not submit rulemaking comments by phone or email. 1. During the public comment period associated with this RFC: a) Submit all comments in response to this notice as described in the Comments section of this RFC. b) Contact the MPCA contact person with clarification questions and requests for more information. 2. After the public comment period closes, route communications to the following staff: a) Rulemaking process: Katie Izzo at 651-757-2595 and katie.izzo@state.mn.us 3  b) Technical subject expert: Hassan Bouchareb at 651-757-2653 and Hassan.Bouchareb@state.mn.us Rules Drafts. The MPCA has not yet drafted the new rule amendments. Parties interested in being notified when a draft of the rules is available and of other activities relating to this rulemaking are encouraged to register at http://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/MNPCA/subscriber/new?topic_id=MNPCA_523 (MPCA GovDelivery—Rulemaking: Cumulative Impacts). Alternative Format/Accommodation. Upon request, this information can be made available in an alternative format, such as large print, braille, or audio. To make such a request, please contact the MPCA contact person. Statutory Authority. Minnesota Statutes, section 115.03, assigns the MPCA the authority to adopt rules regarding the discharge of pollutants, and Laws of Minnesota 2023, chapter 60, article 8, section 3, requires the Commissioner of the MPCA to adopt rules to implement cumulative impacts analysis for permit decisions in EJ areas. The content of the rule is specified in the law. _________________________________ Katrina Kessler, Commissioner Minnesota Pollution Control Agency July 12, 2023 Date 4