Attachment 3

February 28, 1996

TO:	Communication and Outreach Work Group Members

SUBJECT:	Minutes from February 20, 1996 Communication and Outreach Work Group Conference Call

I.	PURPOSE

A conference call was held on February 20, 1996 to discuss potential Work Group products and how intended audiences might best be reached. Following is a summary of the discussion and proposed action items.

II.	PARTICIPANTS

Work Group members in attendance:

Tom Curran, Co-chair, OAQPS/ITG

Jan Kleeman, OAQPS/ITG

Bruce Carhart, OTC

Rob Valero, AAMA

Alice Collingwood, PSAPCA

Tad Aburn, MDE

Work Group members not in attendance:

Nancy Kruger, STAPPA/ALAPCO

Nancy Seidman, Massachusetts DEP

Caryl Pfeiffer, Kentucky Utilities Co.

Scott Thomas, Oklahoma DEQ

Ron White, Co-chair, ALA

Kathy Ellis, DOD

Veronica Kun, NRDC West

Quin Shea, NMA

Sandy Stash, ARCO

Other EPA attendees: Bill Hamilton (Designated Federal Official), Bob Stallings, Larry Wallace, Phil Dickerson, Barbara Parzygnat, Christine Sansevero, and Karen Borel (Region IV).

Donna Lee Jones and Eric Schweitzer, EC/R Incorporated (EPA Contractor support)

III.	MEETING SUMMARY

Action items

1)	Mr. Aburn and Ms. Collingwood will compile lists of the "top 10" questions State/local agencies are likely to ask regarding program implementation and send to Ms. Kleeman by COB Thursday, February 29.

2)	Members are asked to determine the Work Group's ultimate audience.

3)	A timeline illustrating FACA's agenda for the Work Group, along with a requisite timeframe for accomplishment, would be useful in establishing the Work Groups priorities.

Other items to note:

2)	Three possible days and four possible times for the biweekly Work Group meetings were discussed:

Tuesday	2:00 - 3:30 p.m., EST

Wednesday	12:30 - 2:00 p.m., EST

Thursday	11:00 - 12:30 p.m., EST or

12:30 - 2:00 p.m., EST

Thursday from 12:30 to 2:00 p.m. EST was the best time for the members in attendance.

3)	Several Work Group members were not able to gain access to the call. EPA will investigate the problems with access to the 919-541-xxxx teleconference numbers, but will begin using teleconference lines out of Washington D.C. (202 area code) for future calls due to the problems with the lines for the first 2 work group calls.

4)	The first in-person Communication and Outreach Work Group meeting will be in Alexandria, VA on Wednesday, March 20, 1996 from 7:00 to 9:30 p.m. at the Radisson Mark Hotel. There will be an initial 30-minute period for introductions of Work Group participants.

5)	The FACA Ozone, PM, and Regional Haze Implementation Programs Subcommittee will meet at the Radisson on Thursday, March 21, 1996, and the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee will meet on Friday, March 22, 1996.

6)	Alice Collingwood reported problems with receiving the information sent via e-mail. The attached files were "garbage". EPA will work with each individual to try to iron out the problems with sending files via e-mail.

IV.	SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION

The call began with Ms. Kleeman providing a brief recap of the February 7 meeting and subsequent minutes. The top four target audience groups identified by vote in the last meeting were: the media, State/local agencies, affected industries, and the interested public.

Evolution of Communication and Outreach Work Group

Mr. Aburn began the discussion by voicing the question of what the FACA Subcommittee originally had in mind when establishing the Communication and Outreach Work Group. Was this supposed to be a short-term project for the direct benefit of the FACA process on the immediately affected groups, or a long-term outreach and communication project targeted towards the general public to facilitate the long-term FACA Subcommittee objectives?

Mr. Curran responded that initially there were only three Work Groups and FACA was wondering how their message was going to be disseminated. There was also concern about how the Work Groups would communicate with each other.

Target Audiences

Mr. Curran stressed the need to address health issues, but also resource implication issues. Ms. Collingwood concurred, adding that State/local agencies must be the target. Mr. Curran added that targeting State/local agencies is the best way of localizing the issues. He recalled how after the EPA disseminated information on national pollutant trends, the media would request more information pertaining to their localities. Ms. Collingwood reiterated the need to localize the issues without losing the flavor of the message.

Mr. Aburn concurred with the idea of targeting State/local agencies, adding that they may be the group capable of most easily communicating a better understanding of why the standards are being changed. (e.g. the health implications of ozone and PM) State/local agencies also will be in a good position to answer questions of resource availability. The Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) tries to get the right information into the public's hands to inform them why they are being asked to do the things they are.

Ms. Collingwood advised focusing on State/local agencies early in the process because of the importance of their efforts in the implementation process. She thinks the air quality problems are more relevant to people on a local basis.

Mr. Curran encouraged members to start thinking about the Work Group's ultimate audience.

Work Group Objectives and Products

Mr. Aburn and Ms. Collingwood see the Work Group having more of an outreach focus toward those who will be responsible for program implementation, as well as the general public. Long term, there is a continuing sales component to their communication jobs.

Mr. Carhart asked how the Work Group might best deliver its products and what delivery vehicles are available (i.e. who will deliver the products and what will be the medium of delivery?)

Mr. Hamilton envisions the Work Group conducting three activities. First, answering questions on what EPA is thinking on issues. Second, communicating why EPA is/may be revising the standard. Third, communicating what will be required of affected parties to the general public, affected industries, and State/local agencies.

Mr. Curran suggested the Work Group think about what information State/local agencies might need to achieve these goals and asked whether a Work Group goal should then be to get State/local agencies the right information to do their communication job. Mr. Curran questioned whether the Work Group should solicit input from State/local agencies as to their specific needs. He also noted the need to break down the necessary tasks into achievable parts.

Mr. Aburn stressed the importance of getting the right information out first, which can get the public involved and aid the implementation process. Mr. Carhart added the importance of communicating the issue of the regionality of air pollution. He thinks State/local agencies are possibly in the best position to achieve this, and one Work Group objective can be to equip them with the necessary information.

Ms. Collingwood suggested an ongoing dialog with STAPPA/ALAPCO about specific products, rather than just giving people a lot of information. Ms. Borel noted that STAPPA/ALAPCO has an annual meeting to discuss communication issues. Ms. Collingwood is planning to attend their upcoming meeting. Ms. Collingwood also mentioned the upcoming WESTAR conference in Los Angeles. She is leading WESTAR's Public Education and Outreach Work Group whose goal is to produce working papers. Mr. Curran noted that Robin Dunkins would be attending this conference, but that Ms. Collingwood should supply this Work Group with the notes of the WESTAR Work Group meeting.

Mr. Curran commended MDE's use of ozone maps on the evening news and suggested possibly getting help from the OTC, using maps depicting pollution isopleths, and making films of the development of pollution events available via the Internet. He also likes the idea of defining what success would look like. The original intent was to conduct an open process that facilitated participants' understanding without surprises along the way. Information was to be made available to the right people. There is now the need to come to a realistic assessment of when this can be achieved.

Ms. Collingwood said it will be difficult to determine the best vehicle for information delivery until it is known what needs to be communicated.

Mr. Valero added that from industry's perspective it is unclear exactly what will be required [by the new regulations].

Several participants agreed with Mr. Curran's suggestion that this Work Group needs to know what the other Work Groups see as their salient issues and what will be changed with the new regulations.

Mr. Aburn stated the need to identify the key questions the State/local agencies will be asked. He suggested possibly generating a summary piece that explains why there is a new standard, and addresses the question of the severity of the health issues. He volunteered to write up a list of the "top 10" questions that people such as his boss (MDE) and the Governor will need to have answered. Ms. Collingwood also volunteered to compile a "top 10" list of questions that State/local agencies will ask.

Mr. Curran remarked that more technical members of other Work Groups might overlook the importance of resource implication issues. He believes the process may entail a two-way flow between Work Groups in which the Communication and Outreach Work Group says what is being asked and the other Work Groups say what their products are. Ms. Collingwood said that resource implications are the bottom line and are related to the current regulatory backlash.

Mr.Curran said the Work Group should also be thinking about what EPA needs to be doing as far as communication.

Timeframe for Accomplishing Objectives

Mr. Hamilton sees the timeframe for this Work Group reaching beyond the August deadline for the end of FACA's Phase 1.

Mr. Carhart also liked the idea of the Work Group's timeframe extending past August, 1996. He thinks that the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) for implementation of ozone and PM NAAQS would be a good time to launch the program. Mr. Carhart also reminded members that the Work Group was formed, in part, to provide the basis on which the regulatory actions will be taken.

Mr. Curran agreed, stating that the ANPR is designed to identify some of these issues, such as regionality, the possible need for broader control regions, and the building blocks of successful program implementation.

Mr. Carhart believes the Work Group must establish priorities. To this end, a timeline illustrating FACA's agenda for the Work Group along with a requisite timeframe for accomplishment might be useful.