|
Emissions inventory steering committee, As noted previously, the regional inventory project was an
item for discussion at this past week’s GLAD Program Management Team
(PMT) meeting. The outcome of the discussion is that the management team
remains supportive of the emissions inventory project and its goals. In
addition, there were some important comments made and discussion suggesting our
project consider ways it might be able to refocus or restructure itself to best
meet both the needs of the state agencies, as well as the goals of the GLAD
program. Following-up on these comments is something we will pursue over the
coming months, with some interaction of both our steering committee and the
GLAD PMT. While the emissions inventory project is an important
component of the GLAD program, the GLAD PMT had not directly discussed the
project in detail over the past several years. Although rather brief, the
discussion last week was highly productive. I encouraged the group to be
critical in their view of how the project is going and in suggesting
improvements. Although there were some comments that the project appears to
have extended beyond its term of usefulness and is providing less benefit than
in the past, the consensus view from the states was that there remains an
important need for a project of this type and that the benefit to the states on
whole remains substantial. The group agreed to support its continuation, with
an emphasis of focusing on identifying additional ways within the project to
support GLAD-related items. Among the possibilities suggested were the following: -
Focusing more directly on Persistent Bioaccumulative
Toxic contaminants, including but not limited to: o
Improving the inventory of PCBs o
Improving the inventory of dioxins and furans o
Revisiting the mercury emissions inventory /
incorporating data the agencies have generated outside the EI program o
Evaluating possibilities for inventorying
“chemicals of emerging concern” o
Supporting PBT modeling studies or other
assessments We can consider these and other ideas as we move forward on
the project. I think that over the next 6-12 months it is important to make a
dedicated effort to consider the project structure and direction. That many of
the states see substantial benefit in the project is encouraging. That there
are some concerns regarding the project among other states is something we
should take to heart and consider whether there are changes that could improve
our project over the coming years, providing greater benefit to the GLAD program
and the state agencies at a lower level of burden. On balance, I think the
message coming out of the discussion was a positive one. This is a unique and
challenging project in the extent to which it draws on state agency staff to
provide mutual and regional benefits. I think it’s important that we begin
to consider ways to maintain the momentum and potential of the project into the
future. I look forward to considering some of these issues over the
coming months. If you haven’t done so in a while, it may be useful to track
down your GLAD PMT representative at some point to discuss the project and any
ideas for how it continue to jointly benefit your state and the regional GLAD
goals of addressing toxic deposition. All the best, Jon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jon Dettling Great Lakes Commission 734-274-5183 |