1

Walser, John

From: Merta, Ed L. <emerta@cabq.gov>

Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 11:48 AM

To: Walser, John

Cc: Nieto, Margaret E.; Donaldson, Guy; Puplampu, William

Subject: RE: State Board items 

Hello John,

I’m writing to follow up on our phone conversation on Wednesday regarding Exhibit 11c of our State Boards submittal.

After that conversation with you, we now agree with you that the City of Albuquerque Personnel Policies and

Regulations document appearing in Exhibit 11c does not need to be included in the New Mexico SIP. Please disregard my

earlier memo to the contrary.  

Our original argument in favor of including the city personnel policies in the SIP rested on language in CAA Section 128

that applies conflict of interest disclosure requirements to “the head of an executive agency with similar powers” to

those of a board such as the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board (Air Board). We were concerned

that this clause, by our initial interpretation of it, might apply to the Director of the City of Albuquerque Environmental

Health Department, who as a city employee would be covered by language in the personnel policy related (at least by

implication) to conflicts of interest. In that light, we felt the personnel policy should be considered for inclusion in the

SIP to address the “head of an executive agency” clause in Section 128.  

However, even if our initial interpretation of that clause was correct, we now agree with you that the purpose of this

particular SIP submittal is to address only requirements for members of the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Air Quality

Control Board, not any other body or agency. The city personnel policy does not apply to Air Board members, because

they are not city employees.  

Hope this helps, let me know if there’s anything else you need and have a good weekend,  

‐Ed

From: Walser, John [mailto:Walser.John@epa.gov] 

Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 3:17 PM 

To: Merta, Ed L. 

Cc: Nieto, Margaret E.; Donaldson, Guy; Puplampu, William 

Subject: RE: State Board items 

Thank you very much Ed for the information below in response to my earlier questions!  We will take a careful look at

this, and your recommendation for including Exhibits 7c and 11c in the SIP.

Cheers,

John

Mr. John Walser | Physical Scientist

Air Planning Section

U.S. EPA Region 6, 6PD‐L

1445 Ross Ave., Suite 700

Dallas, TX 75202‐2733

Email: walser.john@epa.gov

Tel: 214‐665‐7128 | Fax: 214‐665‐6762
2

From: Merta, Ed L. [mailto:emerta@cabq.gov]  

Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 2:33 PM

To: Walser, John

Cc: Nieto, Margaret E.

Subject: State Board items  

Hi John,

Here is our feedback on the two State Boards related questions that you had. Hope this is helpful! Please call anytime if

you have questions, hope all is well... ‐Ed

1) MEHAB. In sum, MEHAB once served a useful purpose but no longer functions in any way and now exists only on

paper. The existence or operation of MEHAB is not necessary for continued functioning of the Air Board or the

Environmental Health Department in any legal or practical sense, as far as we can determine. Therefore, we

think the two MEHAB ordinances (Exhibits 2c and 3c) most likely do not need to be in the SIP. Details are in an

attached memo on the subject, as well as in a SIP submittal from 1985 that has a good summation of the original

purpose of MEHAB and its relation to the Air Board.

2) Exhibits 7c, Public Boards etc., and 11c, City of Abq Personnel Rules & Regulations. After looking these over,

we feel that important provisions in these two exhibits clearly are directly related to the purposes of CAA

Section 128, regarding public interest representation on a board and disclosure of conflict of interests. Other

provisions in the exhibits are not so obviously related, but are difficult, from a legal standpoint, to disentangle.

Thus, we feel that the documents in these two exhibits should be considered for incorporation in their entirety

into the New Mexico SIP, as is the case with other statutes, such as the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act,

containing both provisions directly related to air quality control and provisions not so obviously related (e.g.

procedural provisions). A detailed description of our reasoning is in an attached memo.