Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: I only believe the first one of

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: those. Yeah.

[Unknown committee member]: We're in the Swiss

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell (Vice Chair)]: Alps. Are

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: we good to go? Okay. Welcome everybody to House Energy and Digital Infrastructure. We are here today to talk a little bit about the 2025 Climate Action Plan with our colleague from the agency of natural resources. So I'm representative Kathleen James from Manchester.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell (Vice Chair)]: Scott Campbell from Saint Johnsbury. Richard Bailey from Mobile two. Michael Southworth, Caledonia two. Christopher Howland, Rutland Ford.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: Dara Torre, Washington Dune.

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: Graham Plubner, Midland thirteen, Burlington.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: Laura Sibilia. Thank you.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Great. And in the room. Hi.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: I'm Laura Sibilia mitigation lead at a natural resource. Great.

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: Dana Lee Perry, the group. Kathleen James, freelance journalist.

[Austin Gaffney (VTDigger reporter)]: Great. Austin Gaffney with BT Digger. Great.

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: Matt Cotto, NetHill Consulting, a member of the Vermont Climate Council.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Great. Alright. Thanks everybody for being

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: here for the record. Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Julie Morris, secretary of natural resources.

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: Jane Losarchat, climate action office, agency of natural resources.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: I'm going to share my screen.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: Oh, alright. Excellent.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: So we are here to do a couple of things this afternoon. First is to give a high level overview of the update to the climate action plan that was adopted by the Climate Council in July. And then talk in a little bit more detail about one of the requests contained in the Climate Action Plan, which was around requesting a recommendation for a greenhouse gas reporting role, and Jane's gonna cover that part of our presentation. And I understand you guys

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: have another meeting at two?

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: I have a meeting at I do believe that is correct.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Okay. So maybe to give everybody time to reset, should we try to be done by 01:50, 01:55?

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: That would fabulous if Okay. Alright. So I thought I could cover what the Climate Action Plan was, sort of our process around how we went about the update and then walk you through the priority actions. And then Jane is gonna talk both about the review we did and looking at different possible approaches to a greenhouse gas reporting program for Vermont, our recommendation and the estimated cost of implementation should the legislature choose to pursue that. So as I'm sure many of you recall, the Global Warming Solutions Act was passed in 2020, which established the Climate Council. We adopted our initial Climate Action Plan in December 2021. And then we are moving into this every four year cadence for an update. So this first update, quite not four years, was due July 2025, but now we will be on a four year cadence moving forward. The CAP has sort of several key areas or themes that run through it. First is focused on greenhouse gas emissions or climate pollution. We sometimes refer to that as cross sector mitigation. So that includes transportation and how we fuel ourselves to get around, how we heat and cool our buildings and the electricity sector. The second big focus area is around agriculture and ecosystems. So this includes things like nature based solutions, wetland restoration, floodplain restoration, our working lands and the opportunities presented in the agriculture and forestry sector to help sequester carbon and potential investments to be made in that space. The third key area is rural resilience and adaptation, and the themes that emerge from that are around capacity and planning at the local level, how to protect the existing built environment, and then some of the growing concerns around public health, specifically, some of the air quality issues that are starting to emerge, more and more frequently with wildfires both here and in Western states that affect our air quality. And then we have a batch of what we call cost cutting solutions. So these are things that actually touch on each of those first three buckets generally, education and outreach, workforce development, and then financing and funding, how we're actually going to pay to do the work. So the the work of updating the climate action plan, while led by the Climate Council, a lot of the nitty gritty work is actually done by the council's five subcommittees. Each counselor serves on at least one subcommittee, but then they also pull in other relevant experts onto each of the subcommittees. So the membership of the subcommittees is larger than just the Climate Council. And you can see those first three match up with three of our focus areas. We also have a Just Transition Subcommittee that's looking at how the different policies and programs impact or benefit the most vulnerable Vermonters. And then we established the Science and data subcommittee recognizing that there's a great deal of technical information that needs to underpin this work and have benefited greatly from a number of academic partners among others that participate on that particular subcommittee and are able to help us review different data and work products and ask questions and provide advice. So as we went about the work of updating the Climate Action Plan, public engagement has been a theme throughout that was directed by the Global Warming Solutions Act, and that it asked us to to undertake what I would say is a pretty expansive public engagement process. And I think we even exceeded the expectations established in the Global Warming Solutions Act. As we worked to develop the plan, we held eight in person meetings and 11 virtual meetings. Those eight in person meetings were scheduled around the state. Every climate counselor was encouraged to attend, I think, at least one and really two of those different sessions to be able to hear directly from Vermonters. We also have a communications lead within the Climate Action Office who has been working to establish tabling at a lot of different events. So not just asking Vermonters to come to us to learn more about climate action, but going to Vermonters and being able to share information. We have also been working to build a partnership with community based organizations to help push information and opportunities for public comment out, and then have tried to provide multiple pathways for folks to provide comment who may not want to speak at a public meeting and accepted written comments on the climate action plan. So in hearing from Vermonters on our initial draft, the key messages were too many ideas. I think there are 150 plus actions identified in the plan. We sort of narrowed it down to about a top 50 and heard through Vermonters Loud and Clear that's still way too many things. So the list I'll present to you today is actually 10 priority actions. There were concerns about the language being not accessible. And this is something that Jane and her team have worked on since we adopted the plan with a consultant specifically to try to create plain language versions of the executive summaries so that we are hopefully making these work products more accessible to the broad public. A lot of folks saying to be mindful costs and also that there's a need to ensure funding. I see those as going hand in hand. And then, we did receive a a a not insignificant number of comments about geothermal networks as a very specific technology. And so the right hand circle behind me talks about how we we went about addressing those concerns. As I mentioned, the first couple, thinking about affordability, and this is really a theme that runs throughout. One of the top 10 priority actions is thinking about bridge funding. Previously in previous sessions, the legislature has taken up a clean heat standard, taken up a cap and invest program. These are big, meaty policy pieces. And the practical effect is we haven't necessarily done maybe something smaller and more manageable in the short term. And the council brought that forward as an idea in response to some of the concerns from Vermonters. And then we did create a new recommendation around geothermal networks and then a couple of other instances where there are gaps highlighted by the public. I think before I jump into those those top 10 priority actions, just I think this context is really important. We are sort of on the famine side of feast or famine, I think, the moment we find ourselves in. We've had unprecedented federal investment in climate action, and it is ending really abruptly. And this requires some pretty significant changes in the assumptions about what financial resources are available to Vermont in terms of making investments in climate action. This isn't limited just to greenhouse gas emissions. This also applies to our resilience work and disaster recovery. We also are seeing the federal government pulling back on key policies such as their support electrification of vehicles and the deployment of renewable energy. Don't need to look any further than the pauses on some of the offshore wind projects that are are still in effect as we speak. And we know even before these changes at the federal level, there was going to be a really heavy lift to meet the requirements, the Global Warming Solutions Act. So I think it's just important to be mindful of the fact that reduced funding coupled with the affordability challenges we heard about loud and clear from Vermonters, require us carefully to think carefully about how we prioritize our investments to reduce emissions and how we're balancing emissions reductions against making the state more resilient. The update to the cap, as a result, emphasizes actions that make investments or would make investments in resilience, preparedness and community development, help make our homes more efficient and help Vermonters switch to price stable, sources of energy or heat and transportation, invest in building the workforce needed to implement these actions, recognizing we need thousands of additional workers to do this effort at scale, and then that sustainable long term funding source to support this work. So the top 10 recommendations, and maybe we just also flag here, particularly on this first one, but there's a couple of others as well. Earlier this fall that we released with the treasurer's office of resilience implementation strategy, which is focused on on just one side of the work of the climate action plan. The expanding and maintaining a permanent funding source for the flood resilient communities fund was also a key recommendation in the resilience implementation strategy, as well as from the Climate Council. There was also a call to invest in municipal infrastructure to support compact development. So this is really water and sewer, but other pieces may tuck up into there as well. Also included in the top 10 was funding for programs that achieve climate goals for our farms and forests. That is really Vermont's climate strength is our farms and forests and trying to make sure that our working lands remain economically viable and therefore a part of our climate solution. Looking for ways to promote equitable landscape connectivity and conservation. This ties into work that is being led by VHCB with strong support from ANR under Act 59, which is the 30 by 30 conservation bill, but making sure we're thinking about humans in the context of this as well as the needs around biodiversity. The importance of continuing to weatherize homes. We have enjoyed a significant uptick in our pace of home weatherization over the last several years with federal funds growing from less than 2,000 homes a year weatherized to about 4,000 homes a year, and trying to maintain that pace was front and center. And then taking preparatory steps to join a cap and invest program when a viable one may exist. And this really gets at that greenhouse gas reporting framework that Jane will talk about in a minute. Continuing down the top 10 list, one is to support utility programs that ensure that the electric grid supports customer electrification and resilience. It doesn't do us a lot of good to have homes that rely on electricity for heat and cars that rely on electricity to drive if those electrons aren't making their way to people's homes to charge that equipment or power that equipment. And then couples or goes hand in hand with this idea that those are two of remain two of our key strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which is the beneficial electrification of vehicles and buildings. And then I think rounding out the top 10 is identifying that bridge funding or revenue source to immediately support some of these priority actions. And then also, are in working in partnership. We and are working in partnership with the Department of Labor to help implement some of the US Climate Alliance's climate ready workforce initiative. And this, you know, is sort of a very specific piece, but of that larger need to make sure we have the workforce trained to support the types of projects and programs necessary to achieve the goals of the global warming solution. So in terms of where where things head from there, the CAP recommendations do require a combination of legislative and administration actions. There are definitely pieces of this that would require the legislature to pass significant legislation as well as allocate resources to advance those recommendations. In addition, or maybe specifically to call out the Global Warming Solutions Act does have a line in there that would require ANR to adopt any rules consistent with the climate plan before July 1. But the cap does not direct any rules under that timeline for the time being. Happy to answer questions if there are any about the LEVZEV electrode low emissions vehicles role package that we are currently in the throes of working on. But would say that that's sort of outside the climate plan and more just consistent with our current practice. And then the Climate Council itself has a series of commitments it has made to implementation, including continuing to monitor and track progress. We will be submitting the annual legislative report on behalf of the Climate Council at the end of this week. The Climate Council is committed to looking for additional resources to make the plan actionable, continuing to work in partnership with state government and the legislature to advance all of the actions in the plan, but specifically these 10 priority actions. The climate council will be meeting on a quarterly basis so that we can continue to engage with the public, even knowing we've got sort of this lull over the next couple of years before we will start the work necessary to build towards the next revision to the climate plan. And then we had a climate council steering committee meeting yesterday where we talked about the need to continue to have some regular touch points with our subcommittee so that they don't disband completely in the interim. I think committees like the science and data subcommittee have an ongoing role reviewing the greenhouse gas inventory, for example, that the agency produces annually. Some of the other subcommittees, the role is a little less clear, but that's something the the steering committee and the council as a whole will continue to to move on over the next few months here to make sure that that those folks that are so critical to building the plan are remain engaged even over the next couple of years as things are relatively low level. And this is sort of a handoff for me to Jane, which is the CAP update that include the specific request to ANR for us to develop a framework for recording greenhouse gas emissions. This memo that we prepared was submitted, I think we missed December 15 by a couple of days, but that week, so went to the committees of jurisdictions and I believe it was part of what Jane submitted as materials. So, it should be available on your website as part of what we provided for our testimony today. And to identify specific statutory changes or funding that would be needed to support the implementation of a greenhouse gas reporting rule, recognizing that that this is sort of one of the necessary steps along the way to many of the larger policies that have been contemplated by this body over the last couple of years. Okay.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Let me just yeah. I think I wanna stop and ask if anybody has questions for secretary Moore on all that she's already presented, and then we'll turn it over to Jane and move into the greenhouse gas report. So, rep, what group?

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: Sibilia's hand was up on me. That was a second.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Okay. Rep Sibilia? Thanks.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: One note, I think you had said A and R needs to come up with these rules next year.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: It's this year. Thank you. Yes.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: 2526. Yes. Confusion. My question was around the 2021 Climate Action Plan. If you can just remind me what proposals the administration brought forward to implement some of the strategies that were in there.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: That is a great question. I mean, we have I don't know, Jane, if you have that in front of you. I may have to get back to you, but we have been tracking sort of legislative initiatives and proposals throughout that have supported implementation of some of the recommendations in the climate plan.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: It would be great if you could get back and just to be clear. Mhmm. My question was what proposals the administration has brought forward Just an act legislature. As opposed to the legislature, the strategies in 2021 plan.

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: If I might remind the secretary, you did bring forward advanced clean cars too and trucks. Yes.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: If there are any others, be creating. She'll just have that list. Sure. You. That's a

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: good one.

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: Yes. The slide behind you, does significant emitters include the biomass generators?

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: We'll talk a little bit about our recommendation for scope of coverage in a minute.

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: Thank you.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Any committee questions on everything that secretary Moore said before this slide? Because I think the second half of our testimony is gonna be about this. Right? Okay. Yes. General questions about secretary Morrow's overview and intro. Yeah. Excuse me. Bless you.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: I was just gonna ask about the workforce initiative. Did that come with funding?

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: It it did not come with funding, although the US Climate Alliance has specific opportunities to apply for technical assistance. Okay. And we were actually just awarded from the June round of funding, but we've just initiated the contract a project in partnership with Department of Labor that is focused on that. So that initiative is really focused on sort of career pathways and apprenticeships for jobs. And Vermont is co there are three sectors of work within that workforce initiative, and we're co leading with Arizona the resilience focused work around resilient workforce. There's also a clean manufacturing and a heat pump sort of technology work group that other states are leading that we benefit from their learning on. But for the resilience one, we just got a $100,000 grant that's going actually to Vermont Outdoor Business Alliance to support looking at pathways for career pathways and apprenticeships in partnership really with Department of Labor around outdoor based jobs. So it's also expanding what they typically do beyond outdoor recreation and really looking at also any outdoor based careers. So, like, foresters, surveyors Mhmm. And that I'd be happy to share that grant, like, application and work plan just because it is very interesting, and I we see it as a catalyst for other sort of career patterns in the client space. Great. Thank you.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell (Vice Chair)]: It's okay. Thank you. Secretary Morrow, I was looking at your signing statement at the end of the climate action plan also, and and you raised the tension between, the cost of doing whatever of additional funding, for example, for weatherization or or other programs as as opposed to the future benefits from from that. And I and I I guess I'm wondering whether you have explored or are working on any programs that would include raising revenues in view of the decline of the law of federal funding that would also find a way to to balance the impacts on low and moderate income folks. So it's a it's a tricky thing, but I'm but I'm just wondering if you're if you're if that's something that you're working on also.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: We haven't been looking at at revenue raising packages.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell (Vice Chair)]: K. Let's so we hear that the weatherization program is looking at a if not an immediate sort of slope over the next few years. And and that is that it would be a cliff if if the federal funding went away more quickly than it currently expected to. So that seems like a real a real concern since that's a huge part of equity equation for helping folks at the lower end of the economic scale deal with the cost of energy and comfort and, you know, sustainability and durability and all of these things.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: It it is. It it improves the quality of our housing stock, obviously. And then also, there is a a significant investment that's been made largely outside of ANR through like the Department of Public Service in particular, well as the Office of Economic Opportunity and the Agency of Human Services over the last several years and helping build up the capacity for that work with these federal funds and know that those teams are working together to try to find a way to maintain the level of effort we currently have. Looking at reggie proceeds and and other sources of of existing funding that might be used to to support that

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell (Vice Chair)]: work. Yeah. Really important. And I was also looking at the PVC report regarding 01/1942, correct if it's last year, maybe it's 2024, around energy affordability. And a couple of their recommendations were around raising revenue, for example, the fuel tax that funds weatherization. And also, they they recommended general fund support for, of course, member funds gonna be a little tight this year. Yeah. But, anyway, that obviously, they they they were they were looking at the sort of how vital it is to to find a way to raise some revenue. So I I would hope to hear that you're working on something along your lines at some point. Sure.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: We I mean, we do also have this as part of the work Jane and her team does the annual investment report in climate action, and it demonstrates the considerable sums that Vermont is already investing in climate action, I think we're north of $400,000,000.

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: Last year, we were north of 500. This year, it'll be north of 300. Okay. And so I would also encourage you to to look at

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: some of the revenues that have already that are already being invested in this space. Yeah. And some of it may be a prioritization. Yes.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell (Vice Chair)]: Yes. Okay. Alright. Thank you.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Okay.

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: Alright. Thank you. So, Jane Zorczak, Climate Action Office. Thank you for having us. Just on that first slide, I wanted to characterize the greenhouse gas reporting recommendation. As secretary Moore spoke to the top 10, this recommendation, it part of a multipronged recommendation around a cap and invest program that made it to our top 10 for the climate action plan, understanding that this is foundational work to stand up any policy around reducing emissions in Vermont, this kind of data information rapport with potentially regulated entities. At this point, there is no viable cap and invest program to move forward with joining, and so the climate council put forward the idea of the agency doing our research and coming forward with a recommendation around a greenhouse gas reporting program. It also put forward within that recommendation the agency continuing to monitor and work collaboratively to monitor other states' cap and invest programs, most notably New York, which has is advancing only a greenhouse gas reporting program currently, no longer looking at a cap and invest imminently, as well as further reviewing and studying the impacts of any kind of policy like that on affordability in Vermont, as well as how if you moved forward with that, you would consider returning revenue to hold harmless low income Vermonters and, you low income Vermonters. Recommendation built considerably on the report that the treasurer submitted to the legislature last February. Treasurer Pcheck spoke to the need for a comprehensive greenhouse gas reporting program, which would be foundational to any sector wide policy or regulatory approach to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. He also identified the development of the framework for reporting greenhouse gas emissions as that foundational step and recommended that we continue to monitor the other programs, as I suggested, identifying when one might be viable to join, and we are doing that. So in order to stand up our recommendation, our staff within the Climate Office and Lauren Ashbrook, who's recently joined our office, helped lead this work with Brian Woods. We reviewed two different frameworks for how we could pursue this approach. In the memo that we put forward to you, we briefly summarize our rationale, and I'm gonna go through that now with you. But what I'll highlight at the end of this presentation is the detailed appendices and tables in the back of that report that really reviewed all the other states that have greenhouse gas reporting programs, as well as all the current statutes on book that require reporting of similar information to the Department of Tax, Department of Motor Vehicles, Public Service Department, and others. That approach is harmonized would have been harmonization, which we really wanted to really explore whether a greenhouse gas reporting program could simply be stood up by having other agencies that already collected this data pull it and give it to ANR for our needs. The long and short of that is that we did not feel like harmonization was an appropriate path to pursue at this time in large part because there were shortcomings in the data largely around biofuels, which would be a major component of a greenhouse gas emissions reporting program. So there would need to be changes made to the data collected by other agencies. In addition, the those agencies have privacy sharing data, so there were hurdles around overcoming accessing that data. We have done that through DMV in the past with the transportation fuels, but tax has more challenges in that they do not like to collect data for reasons outside of the scope of the rationale for the tax purposes. And then there would also be verification issues and compliance issues in reviewing even the data that is collected with respect to compliance over time. So with that in mind, our agency put forward a recommendation to the climate council and ultimately to the legislature to stand up a stand alone reporting. So a stand alone reporting rule would best support the goals of the Climate Action Plan and allow the Agency of Natural Resources to define and collect and analyze sufficient data for us to develop robust estimate of statewide emissions. It would allow us over time to adjust the scope of the reporting program, and if necessary, to think about how that aligns for future mitigation activities, policies, in other words, that we would wanna put in place. And in this time of significant federal uncertainty and rollbacks in the data being collected by the Environmental Protection Agency that Vermont relies on for our greenhouse gas inventory to produce annually. It would help us move in house the data collection that we now rely on from federal datasets. So this would really help us with respect to that data.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Jane, would you prefer that we save our questions to the end? Do you have a ton more slides? Or I I can make notes. Three or four

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: slides more. So your choice. I'm I'm fine to be broken up or I'm fine to wait.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Okay. Can we go back one slide? Sure. I have a a big broad question, but I am gonna save that till the end. I I'm curious to understand, and I am not an attorney, but, ANR already has really broad rulemaking authority. And so I don't I don't understand why, ANR believes that it needs legislation in order to just embark on this rulemaking process. I I don't think it's consensus. I mean, from what I've been reading and trying to, you know, do research, I don't think it's consensus that ANR needs us to pass a bill.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: So I I think it probably would be good for you to hear from one of our attorneys. They have looked extensively at legal challenges that have been filed in other states Okay. Around greenhouse gas reporting rules and believe that there is benefit in the environment we currently find ourselves in in having the legislature specifically authorize this work.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Okay. I was just curious because I mean, I'm I've already told the I'm working on the bill. I'm planning to introduce it, but I was just curious about so we could have your attorneys in Yeah. To hear why they feel that kind of a belts and suspenders sort

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: of program. Yeah. They they can share the challenges that have been filed in other states and how a rule could be structured that would guard against some of those same challenges getting filed to you. And Lauren can correct me from the bench.

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: She can introduce herself if I get this wrong, but I believe it's in the memo too. Every state that has a greenhouse gas emissions reporting program has both the general authority of the Clean Air Act as well as specific authority. And that the one place where there was a challenge, our attorney can speak to this, they went back and got specific authority.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Great. Thanks. Okay. Oh, yeah.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: Perhaps a good deal. Madam chair, I I just would like to thank you for that question and and express. I'd really love to have more Yes. Attorneys that have

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: this Mhmm.

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: Specific issue. Okay. Great. Thanks. Yeah. And that note at the bottom was going to allude to the fact that our attorneys are prepared to come in and speak to this and give you the specific examples. And in addition, obviously, we'll go into some of the details of the resources we're requesting in the slides right now and in the memo you provided, but we'll also speak to some of the other reporting programs, specifically through the Clean Heat Standard, where some of the challenges the PUC said in documentation and compliance were because not an adequate resource. So that's our discussion today.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: That's great. That'll get back to my big I said I had a big question, which is that I wanna make sure the committee understands and that I understand the difference between what we're proposing here, what data we're proposing that we gather, and the existing greenhouse gas inventory, the data you get that tax has, and the fuel dealer registry that, you know, was envisioned, let me put it

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: that way, by the clean heat standard.

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: Yeah. But yeah. Okay. I'm gonna go onward. I I wanna respond probably. Yeah. So this a high quality dataset of which we do identify through many of the points you just made, chair James, about the other where we currently have data. There are significant gaps, and having our own reporting role and having that data flow to us would ensure that we would fully understand and be able to evaluate the benefits of emission reduction efforts, inform future policy discussions, and ensure that we are able to design those policies to meet the needs of low and middle income homeowners. Resources are needed to both stand up the program, so the digital platform compliance, but then also support that long term and cover it going forward. In addition, one of the comments that we've heard over through the climate council discussion on this as well as through the PUC report that by not resourcing it and you get inequities and compliance, and that's also a challenge for potentially regulated entities. And the estimates in the PUC report, we reviewed this last night to check this could be out of date, but in the legislative report, which I reattached to our testimony today, the data as of a year ago was that only 55% of entities that were obligated to report were reporting through the PUC's program. And as you probably know, there is an order that they are no longer enforcing that. So no one is reporting that. So in thinking about resource needs, we are bucketing it in four categories, thinking about both and and then further allocating it between the staff time needed to stand up these programs as well as the one time costs and the ongoing annual costs. So in that case, we're thinking about program establishment and management. So really the work to do the rule making, the work to build the platform that people would that entities would report into, thinking about how we develop and ultimately maintain that digital platform for compliance entities. The analysis and verification that we would largely do in house initially, but then likely hire a third party enforcer over time. And then compliance and enforcement enforcement enforcement, which would start as a relationship building between our office where the program would sit and the entities over time would shift to think about how what enforcement would look like in multiple years down the road as folks are reporting. So we're thinking about two full time staff over time and one time costs of $300,000 and an increase in our base funding of $200,000 around third party verification and platform.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Did you guys check-in with ADS, I guess, on the Mhmm.

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: I was just gonna say these numbers were vetted in large part first through conversations with New York and Massachusetts Right. Who both have Massachusetts has a reporting program that they're standing up for clean heat standard, and New York has a reporting program in anticipation of a cap and invest down the road. These numbers were scaled back from conversations with them, understanding just sort of the capacity in larger states. And then we also did meet with ADS about creating these platforms in house, and we'll say that the cost of the digital platform is expected to be higher through a contract than it would be through ADS. But around the time commitment, ADS is just a longer proposition for how we would set it up versus going up to a contract. Okay. Currently, at a minimum, we would recommend all fossil fuels. So all fuels between the residential, commercial, industrial sector being covered as well as transportation. Covered entities would be the suppliers of these transportation and heating fuels. Once some of our open questions around other entities include stationary sources. In the federal datasets, we have anywhere from five to seven sort of large scale entities that report through the EPA tool. Those entities are folks like Global Foundries, UVM, OMYA. Those kind of entities, we want to do a thorough review of where their emissions come from and understand if we would be beyond Global Foundries capturing anybody outside of entities that are simply on that list because of transportation and heating fuels, and therefore, we'd sort of be double counting. So we're we're still considering and would like to entertain a discussion about stationary sources. We're doing some review on that. And then in other states, New York, for instance, they're including other non energy reporters such as agriculture. We're not recommending that right now in Vermont, but just noting that there are other sources that other states are including in greenhouse gas reporting programs. Yep. And then simply, there has been an extensive amount of work done on this beyond what we've included in the memo. Our general counsel has done extensive legal work on behalf of the secretary, and we could transition that likely into a more public facing review and presentation for you all. And there's a lot of details that we'd be happy to come back and speak the specifics on around.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: I'll go back to my question then. Can you guys dive into I really wanna make sure I understand this. How this would be different from, better than, larger than, more timely than the we we have the greenhouse gas inventory. I know that's different, but I wanna understand why and how that's different. Mhmm. You had mentioned some of the thoughts around why this is different from some of the data that's collected by tax and then tax has, I know, its own privacy concerns about sharing that data? And then I think you answered my question. I mean, you know, the fuel dealer registry that we stood up in anticipation of the clean heat standard being implemented, but it never was, is no one's complying with it. But that had certain you know, we were gonna ask for this, this, and that in that. So can you guys help me with all those different things?

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: Sure. Want me to start? Sure. Okay. So I'll start first with the tax department. Okay. So the tax department cannot share with us the entities that report. So we get volumes of fuel, but we do not know the entities. And there is some benefit over time to understand and build relation with the actual entities who are reporting for both compliance and enforcement. So we get volumes of fuel, and admittedly, the tax department has been wonderful to work with with updating some of their forms and getting us more specific information on types of fuel that is collected that have different emission factors. And so we've gone somewhat as far as we can in a voluntary relationship with the tax department, and they have worked very closely with us. DMV, they collect in large part all the information around fuels and do share through a confidentially confidential agreement between us the entities that has since expired, but we expect we could update that with DMV. What we are short on there is and on both cases is biofuels, and neither organization has indicated one way or another that they would like to start to track the information around biofuels. And I will say that we've shared this memo with and met with DMV and tax department on both of this, and they have supported the approach of a standalone program. That is not to say that we won't consider to continue to go down the path of what we've been calling reverse harmonization, where we really review and think about if we're collecting this data, does who else doesn't need to collect the data to minimize the burden on entities? And some of the table in the back that shows statutes that currently require that information, public service department has some statutes on the books that they don't actually enforce or pull on. We can clean those up so that down the road, there isn't double reporting. There are some other things that we could do through this process. And then all of that data that we would either collect through a reporting program or we currently collect through the DMV and the tax department informs our greenhouse gas inventory. And so this would get us one step closer to better data, which we're constantly trying to do and think about how we improve upon our understanding and what our emissions are in the state and refine that through our greenhouse gas inventory by better data collection and the biofuels component, etcetera, which we model right now

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: in our inventory would become more precise. So the greenhouse gas inventory rule is utterly reliant on data that we're already

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: collecting. Except for where it's not,

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: which is where it's not And you just outlined some

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: of the gaps and the this isn't quite enough and this isn't what we need. And so the And there's also some modeled pieces that come in from EPA that are sort of outside our purview around agriculture and land use. So this way

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: move sources. To move the the the important collection of the data that we need to build good policy, it would move it entirely within your hands. You could get the data you need from the sources that you need it from at the level of detail that you need to create something truly useful for future policy making. This is what I'm hearing. Yes. On that note

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell (Vice Chair)]: Well, I I guess I would just say I I would love to hear more about the reverse or the harmonization effort because it it I'm I'm thinking about the burden on on businesses to to do reporting to, you know, more or less the same data to different entities, you know, in different formats and whatever. It just seems like it would be really much better service government service to to to try to harmonize this and it reduces the burden on on business owners.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: Yeah. And I I think a lot of that is in some of the supplemental materials just identifying at least what those existing reporting requirements are. I think you would need to hear from some of some of the other entities about how they're using that information and if a reverse harmonization at whatever cadence would be prescribed would actually work for them to meet their needs. I don't know that we got into that level of detail with them other than just identifying sort of where those overlaps exist so that that conversation could continue.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell (Vice Chair)]: Yes.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Could some of those there'll be couldn't those things be addressed? Because, like, what I understand you're needing from us is broad legislative authority to go do this. And then could all of all of these details just be worked out in your rule making process?

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: I don't think so because I think some of them are statutory requirements. Okay.

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: And so they would also require additional legislative changes. Okay. Sorry. I would just acknowledge that we could work closely to have more detailed conversations with public service department feels front and center because they have a number of statutes on the books that they don't even act on, but could. And then DMV and tax to see if there's any statute cleanup that they would support. And that's something we could take away from this conversation just to pursue with those agencies to bring forward any kind of would be really helpful.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Would the statutory revisions be required only if you're gonna try to dive deeper into reverse harmonization?

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: Yes.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: So if we go with the standalone reporting requirement that you guys recommended, we don't need to, then you can just

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: write the rule. I think you can

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: do both. Like, give us

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: the tell us to go do the reporting rule and and at the same time, up some of the existing statutes. Okay. Did you have your

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: Oh, I do. Yeah. Yep.

[Unknown committee member]: Is the Department of Public Service or the PUC doing any of this work already? And

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: can you

[Unknown committee member]: give us a are you at a point where you can give us a greenhouse gas inventory now? Do we have any idea what what it may be? And my other question was about the the tracking system. I know I'm not sure which department. There's the Stockholm Institute. Yep. Whatever that program is and who's paying for that. And what does that do that this program that you want us to do in this request?

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: So starting with the Stockholm Environmental Institute, that's the consultant that both ANR and Department of Public Service have used to conduct modeling, scenario based modeling, looking at if you weatherize so many homes, incentivize the purchase of so many electric vehicles, etcetera, what what would the the emissions benefits be of those policy mechanisms? The Stockholm Environmental Institute is also doing work for the Department of Public Service around their comprehensive energy plan. So we're all using the same platform, recognizing that that there's overlap between the climate action work and the comprehensive energy plan and having a single modeling tool and contractor make sure that those efforts speak to each other as well as possible. But so that's really forward looking work that the Stockholm Environmental Institute is doing. It's it's future modeling. In terms of now I've lost track of the other half. The greenhouse gas inventory. Oh, the greenhouse gas inventory. We we publish an annual greenhouse gas inventory. It has a a significant lag in it. It generally lags about two or two and a half years behind the end of the calendar year, in large part because there are not in the sector as much, but in the agriculture and land use spaces, there are regional datasets that we rely on EPA and other federal partners to produce that are inputs into that model. And so we can't finalize our work until they finalize their work. And so there tends to be quite a bit of delay. But we do produce a report each year. I don't know if that's what was in this emissions by sector. We can certainly send around a link to the most recent inventory that I think was published in June this past year.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: That'd be great. We'll post to this testimony. So

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: question and comment. The question is, so did I understand that the inclusion or exclusion of the biomass generating stations is still an open discussion?

[Jane Lazorchak (Director, Climate Action Office, ANR)]: So, biomass comes into play in two sectors. It comes into play in heating sector and then electricity. We're currently not proposing to include the electric sector in this reporting program. In large part, the electric sector is sort of dealt with through our regional greenhouse gas initiative and the cap and invest through that program, as well as the renewable energy standard, and we have good data on the electricity sector. So the bio those two biomass generating facilities, Reigate and McNeill, are in the electricity sector, so therefore are not considered as part of the transportation or RCI sector. The residential, commercial, industrial sector, that is a a I guess I would say is an open ended question. There is heating, obviously. We have not considered the idea of including wood burning heating in the residential commercial sector. It would be challenging to include it, to say the least. And currently, we do not track those emissions in on our in our inventory, on the gross side of our inventory. So it wouldn't have that dual benefit of, like, capture and then report

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: because we don't track this. And

[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: just a a comment. One of the themes in the business world these days is that we have consistently underestimated benefits of automation, and as I think about the burden on the reporting entities, it just feels like that stuff should flow automatically into the report and not have to be extracted and then sent and then re input. That could be automated without too much difficulty and with great benefits to relieve the reporting burden on all the entities and the clerical burden on your teams and all of those things plus improved accuracy typically.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Yep. I think last cue so we can let you guys go on time. I know you said you had a hard stop.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: Yeah. Just to add on to representative Kleppner's question, is that something that you all

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: have considered in terms of automating reporting? We have not gotten into that level of detail, and I suspect some of those businesses may have concerns about our ability to reach in and pull information from them. I think the idea is a web platform to sort of facilitate the transfer of that information, but it wouldn't be automatic.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: Thank you. Yeah.

[Unknown committee member]: Quick one. Statement question. I just wanted to thank you guys for all your work on that. I know there's tremendous amount of work by the council and then your staff, and especially the resilience report. I was very impressed with, and, I hope you all get a chance to to read that because there's a lot of actionable items for strengthening Vermont communities both economically and socially in addition to the environmental considerations. So

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell (Vice Chair)]: thank you for that.

[Julie Moore (Secretary of Natural Resources, ANR)]: Thank you.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Alright. Thank you so much for being here.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: And, yeah, we'll keep you posted.

[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Alright. Should we take a five minute break?