210 likes | 326 Views
Public Hearings on Proposed Revisions to Rules Governing the Nutrient Offset Payment Program March 22, 2010 in Greenville, NC March 23, 2010 in Raleigh, NC. Hearing Agenda. Welcome and Introductions Presentation of Proposed Rule Revisions (15 minutes)
E N D
Public Hearings onProposed Revisions to Rules Governing the Nutrient Offset Payment Program March 22, 2010 in Greenville, NCMarch 23, 2010 in Raleigh, NC
Hearing Agenda • Welcome and Introductions • Presentation of Proposed Rule Revisions (15 minutes) • Opportunity for Questions on Proposed Rules (30 minutes) • Receipt of Comments • Close of Hearing
Background • In 2007 the NC Legislature directed DENR to move to an actual cost approach • EEP augmented existing databases to allow for rate calculations incorporating all costs • Stakeholders were convened and asked to aid in the development of the ACM • Rules were drafted and approved for formal proposal by the EMC
Proposed Rule Revision and Rule Establishment • Proposed Revision of 2B .0240 • Original fee rule proposed to focus on procedural requirements • Proposed Establishment of 2B .0274 • New rule proposed for establishment to contain Actual Cost Method to set rates for payments made to the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Proposed 2B .0240 Amendments • Rate formula deleted - addressed in .0274 • Legislated Requirements: • Specifies 8-digit CU restriction – NOTE Option to consider smaller service area • Requires reduction projects in Falls Lake watershed for impacts in that watershed • Establishes guidelines on use of third party providers • Requires DWQ pre-approval of proposed nutrient offset projects • Specifies Jordan reservoir mitigation location requirements • Allows access for future nutrient rule requirements
Proposed 2B .0274 • Sets forth provisions for setting rates for payment to EEP using Actual Cost Method
Objectives of Actual Cost Method • Account for all costs • Method should be understandable and easy to use • Rates should be predictable and equitable • Rates must change with actual costs • Method must be applicable at various geographic scales • Method must be applicable to either nitrogen or phosphorus offsets
Actual Cost Method Simple Premise: Actual Costs / Total Pounds = Actual Cost per pound
Proposed Actual Cost Method • Completed Projects • Terminated Projects • Existing Projects in Process • Staff • Supplies • Rent All Costs Adjusted to Present Day Costs
Total Pounds Adjusted to Present Day Proposed Actual Cost Method • Represents true cost of implementing new project • Addresses concerns over regulation changes • Ensures rate will never be below actual cost
Adjustment Factor • If Actual Costs are greater than Actual Receipts the difference is distributed to future pounds paid into program • Ensures additional collections are made if historical receipts were below costs
Additional ACM Provisions • General and Special Rates • Adjustment at least annually but more frequently if actual costs are 10% higher than existing rate • In new rate areas where there are no nutrient reduction projects, highest Program rate applies until two projects are at least in design
Anticipated ACM Rates (in pounds) *Does not include Neuse 01 or the Falls Lake Watershed
Opportunity to ask questions regarding the proposed rules…..
Next Steps and Schedule • Comment period open until April 16th • EMC Consideration - July 15, 2010 • Rules Review Commission – August 19th • Targeted effective date – September 1, 2010
Comments will be accepted through April 16th, 2010 Please submit comments to: Suzanne Klimek NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 Or Suzanne.klimek@ncdenr.gov