Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Department of Environmental Quality
Air Pollution Control Board
Regulation for Emissions Trading [9 VAC 5 ‑ 140]
Action Repeal CO 2 Budget Trading Program as required by Executive Order 9 (Revision A22)
Comment Period Ended on 10/26/2022
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
10/14/22  9:29 am
Commenter: Zach Outzen

Comment in Opposition to the Proposed Agency Action

Like many other Virginians, I am strongly opposed to the proposed agency action. As a matter of law, the Commonwealth's participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is mandatory absent legislative action through the General Assembly. Two separate Attorney Generals have issued opinions confirming that the proposed action is in contravention of the law. See Va. Att'y Gen. Op. #21-102; (describing an opinion issued by the Office of Attorney General Jason Miyares, confirming that participation in RGGI is mandatory absent legislative action through the General Assembly.) Simply put, there is no legal authority that can justify the proposed agency action. Regardless of the Governor's spurious assertions to the contrary, proceeding with the proposed agency action threatens costly litigation at the expense of Virginia taxpayers. There are much better uses of our dollars than defending against lawsuits that the Commonwealth is likely to lose.


The proposed action has been justified on the grounds of increasing utility rates. While this is a laudable goal, participation in RGGI itself does not increase utility rates - allowing utilities to pass all kinds of costs along to the ratepayer does. The best possible way to lower utility rates is by reforming monopoly utility rates. 


In conclusion, this comment strongly opposes the proposed agency action.

CommentID: 189783