TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

Yes, the HSR potential of the NEC is a must. However, higher-speed rail — 90 to 125 mph — is a perfect solution for underserved regions the like Great Lakes, Cleveland-Pittsburgh corridor, as well as Ohio’s long-delayed 3C project.

I have lived in rural areas in the Northeast and would like to see changes in the school bus systems in rurala reas. Huge amounts of money are spent and lots of emission per rider. If schools got grants only for EV vans and EV buses and for charging stations and solar panels at the school, there could be reductions in emissions and costs over time, especially if adults could purchase cards that let them ride on partially empty buses. The costs could be sliding scale and adults could be CORY checked and trained to be bus monitors if needed. This would provide bus transport and help defray the cost of school busing in areas where no public busing or few vans for Seniors or disabled persons exist.

On behalf of the Advanced Energy Economy Institute and its affiliate in New York State, the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, we are writing to express our general support for the Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal that was released on October 1.

Before commenting on individual components of the framework, we would like to underscore the importance, timeliness, and wisdom of a multi-state initiative to tackle greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector. In New York, the recent passage of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Action demonstrates that New Yorkers are ready for action on climate change, including measures addressing transportation. In contrast to the electricity sector, emissions from transportation are on the rise and are making up a larger and larger percentage of state and regional greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, it is imperative that states take quick action to cap and gradually reduce these emissions.

Further, just like our states are connected by numerous roads and railways, our policies should be coordinated among states whenever possible, to maximize the beneficial impact and minimize unintended consequences. For this reason, we fully support the initiative for multiple states to work together to align policies.

Some further points:
-- We agree that equity is an important consideration of the Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. Including this perspective from the outset will lead to a stronger and more sustainable program.

-- At the present time, we believe it is correct to have the program apply to wholesale motor vehicle fuels that are delivered for use into a TCI jurisdiction or removed from storage in a TCI jurisdiction. This scope tackles an important emissions sector in a way that is efficient, targeted, and defined. It is appropriate to tackle the transportation sector independently. The electricity sector is already covered by RGGI and a suite of complementary policies, and the building heating sector, which does need to be addressed more affirmatively, will need a different set of complementary policies than the transportation sector. Further, the alternatives for the transportation sector are commercially available and ready to be phased in over time.

-- The emissions reporting, monitoring, and verification components of the framework also make sense; it is important to include these design elements early in the process.

-- Inclusion of a gradually declining cap is critical to the success of the program. It sends a clear market signal that can stimulate private investment in research, development, and deployment, which will lead to lower costs.

-- Finally, the reinvestment of proceeds is an absolutely critical component of this framework. Proceeds should be reinvested by states into transit and vehicle electrification. The importance of a long-term and enduring dedicated funding source for these initiatives cannot be overstated. It has been crucial to the success and progress on the electricity side in New York and elsewhere, and it needs to be created and maintained for the transportation sector as well.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments in support of the Transportation Climate Initiative Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. We look forward to TCI continuing to request and reflect public comments as this regional policy evolves.

Respectfully submitted,
Anne Reynolds, Alliance for Clean Energy New York
Matt Stanberry, Advanced Energy Economy Institute

Please see attached Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers' comments on TCI's Draft Regional Policy Framework.

The citizens of Maine can not afford this ridiculous new tax on fuel. I demand that Governor Mills and the Democratic majority withdraw from the Transportation and Climate Initiative like three other states have done already.

Truthfully, I have no idea where you have gotten this idea from, or what you are thinking.
While many of the public transit "solutions" and feel-good methods you propose might make sense in a densely packed urban area like DC, Massachusetts, ect, in Maine they are terrible ideas, as Maine is largely rural. In fact, with Maine being 89% wooded, the most wooded state on the East coast, I think that these methods are unnecessary. Rural Maine depends on individual vehicles for transportation, and ANOTHER tax on top of what people are already paying will seek to negatively effect an already fragile economy, and burden and ALREADY overtaxed people. Unless over taxation and thus making Maine more difficult to live in is the real goal.
There are many things we all can do to REALLY make the world a better place and our environment leaner and NONE of them involve additional taxation or giving the government more power.
NO new gas tax. NO other taxes either. Clean up your OWN yard before you complain about that of your neighbors.

Not good for Maine or the people that live here. It's already hard enough for the working people of maine to make ends meet, this just adds another financial burden for a problem that doesn't exist in our state.

The Transportation Climate Initiative has proposed using a cap-and-invest approach to reduce pollution from the transportation sector.This is a carbon pricing approach. While theoretically attractive, there are a number of practical reasons that carbon pricing will not work as theorized: In addition, The Regulatory Analysis Project (RAP) recently completed a relevant study: "Economic Benefits and Energy Savings through Low-Cost Carbon Management for Vermont" that raises additional relevant concerns. Other relevant concerns are discussed in the well-written attachment provided. I implore you to read it thoroughly, incorporating the points raised in your planning process.