[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6204662,"mediaKeyId","3778469-7cb8037cc024574acca77cf0bba59d28","parentId",3778469,"title","Michigan agency tells committee Part 10 air testing rules are largely housekeeping updates","audioSeconds",894,"startMs",307000,"endMs",1201000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3778469-7cb8037cc024574acca77cf0bba59d28&start=307&end=1201","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3778469-7cb8037cc024574acca77cf0bba59d28/thumbnail_307000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6204662/Michigan/Michigan-agency-tells-committee-Part-10-air-testing-rules-are-largely-housekeeping-updates","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6204662-601b8187ca9017bcf11b09c8accce8db/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148376&Signature=TB67l4CNTK8EZSVYE4kOlDLelDgtgvSjwqQ-TSkFSmr1FgsjgIFrkqdAFgtk~HkquUez7DQ~j9N14Kz8rUIl5GY1FBNCcckDxmETtWkhjZrODHkfeOIa~MWI2u44fe2LZsrfq1aji9hhth39MaA~riK9~MoYgiHUoMDy1QETzmNI7V1ac3FqaQoBFElboJTMVzkK13zpKJ1aGYN4feH9bhzdnZxUXom4FdOjikV1xZ~aN4Dycsnq67CrU~fkNDgndQMy2NvHQ~KIy3J5AjTUq0Jp~~PHv4x6aCMnfwwpKbNxqKMqAcJJ-DYaBRqG5gBI4cjfdb5QzM6k5~h01YTKPg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Michigan Legislature","date","2025-06-12T01:59:30Z","article","The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy presented proposed updates to Part 10 of the state's Air Pollution Control Rules to the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, saying the changes are largely administrative and intended to align state rules with current testing protocols and federal requirements.

\"I'm Sydney Hart, legislative liaison for the Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy,\" Hart said, introducing the department's overview. Tom Shanley, the department's Air Quality Evaluation Manager, joined Hart and answered technical questions from the committee.

The nut of the presentation: the department said the revisions update references to technical guidelines, consolidate language about the department's authority over performance testing into a single section, specify timing for performance-test notifications, clarify when a stack test begins, and add cross-references intended to remove ambiguity about testing protocols for the automotive sector. Hart said the rulemaking began with stakeholder engagement in late 2019 and included a work group of environmental consultants, industry representatives, academic experts and environmental organizations; a public hearing was held on March 20.

Department officials said the changes are meant to modernize regulatory language and improve consistency rather than to create new regulatory burdens. \"The changes before you today are largely administrative and clarifying,\" Hart told the committee. Shanley added during questioning that the packages are \"mostly housekeeping, changes in references, updating to standard style codes and and requirements,\" and that they are not intended to impose new regulatory requirements on industry.

The department reported receiving one written public comment from Consumers Energy. Officials said that comment prompted specific edits, including removing outdated \"permit to operate\" terminology, aligning temperature references with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards, and updating language about gasket materials and thermometer calibration. The department said it declined some requests because accepted flexibility already exists in the rules or because the requested reference fell outside the scope of this rulemaking.

Committee members asked technical and compliance questions. When asked whether the industry still uses asbestos gaskets for stack testing, Tom Shanley said the industry does not use asbestos gaskets anymore. On wildfire smoke from Canada and ambient air governance, Shanley said that the part 10 provisions govern industrial stack testing and that the agency typically observes about 300 stack tests per year regardless of episodic regional impacts such as wildfire smoke; those episodic events are addressed primarily through public notification and forecasting rather than changing stack-testing expectations.

Hart and Shanley declined to identify changes that would impose new testing obligations, repeatedly describing the revisions as clarification and reference updates. On the Palisades nuclear facility, Shanley said that nuclear power plants generally present a smaller portion of his division's workload from an air perspective and that any incidental permitting needs would be handled by the appropriate division.

The department said the rule language and supporting documents describing stakeholder engagement are in the committee's briefing packet and that staff are available to answer follow-up questions.

Although committee discussion was technical and focused on implementation details, committee members pressed the department on several clarifications, and the department provided specific edits and rationale for the changes it proposed.

If the committee requests additional information, department staff said they will supply the requested supporting documents and technical clarifications to committee members.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Joint Committee on Administrative Rules - 6/11/2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy presented proposed updates to Part 10 of the state's Air Pollution Control Rules to the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, saying the changes are largely administrative and intended to align state rules with current testing protocols and federal requirements.","taxTitle","2025 House Legislature MI, Michigan","taxId",77683,"location","Michigan","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6204657,"Michigan rules for electronic ballot delivery and CAC-only electronic return draw security and scope objections",3606,1229000,4835000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3778469-7cb8037cc024574acca77cf0bba59d28&start=1229&end=4835","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3778469-7cb8037cc024574acca77cf0bba59d28/thumbnail_1229000.jpg","/articles/6204657/Michigan/Michigan-rules-for-electronic-ballot-delivery-and-CAC-only-electronic-return-draw-security-and-scope-objections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6204657-361cba2e3fb6eb279cf93d080f1b43da/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148376&Signature=KV9OwStlmA1qb7pe9pucrvH~oipL2gmeN1z7V2SIQo~3-YwjTQpmbaoAIEbY3ba3SUYJ9edfs65-bm80XGXWcoT9CV1I~VidIdgGg2aMgS1m2MKbUjJ0ie8MQIFXQBr4iSh8xILfiE0P8uULN6MXzfHdkexzsE8v93zlq8ux2RssGOrU8AEruev40zcFIKBdejMPXj4gSblXI7I9oUHT-D2SiRKQPAqEmody-mjnFsX768mdGLSE9Xl5obRbt1OOKLjTt9ZzVUhNzXRsogjHwzyAapBFDIY8nvuA9pfmkFzMDgYArYvJam~coKsaehDbo8LBMt~u16Xsg9ifyDUzlQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Michigan Department of State told the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules that the rule package to implement electronic return of voted ballots for eligible overseas uniformed service members is intended to meet statutory requirements and follow security standards set by the state's information-technology office, but committee members and public commenters raised security and scope concerns.

\"Beginning September 1 of 20 25, eligible members of the military may choose to ... electronically return a voted ballot to their city or township clerk to be counted as provided in the Michigan election law,\" Erin Shore, legislative policy director with the Michigan Department of State, told the committee. Adam Fricasse, deputy director of the Bureau of Elections, described how the rules translate statutory language into operational procedures.

Why it matters: the legislature in 2022 directed the Department of State to establish procedures allowing certain overseas and uniformed service voters to return voted ballots electronically; the committee heard technical details about who is eligible, how identity verification will work and what security standards the department will use. The rules are scheduled to take effect to meet the statutory implementation date and include detailed timelines for ballot delivery and processing.

Scope and verification: Department officials said the rules require eligible voters to be a member of a uniformed service on active duty or a member of the merchant marine absent from the United States and to possess a Department of Defense Common Access Card (CAC) for signing. Adam Fricasse said, \"The common access card is a very specific technology that is only available, currently to very select people within the Department of Defense.\" The rules, as described by the department, do not permit other forms of signature for electronic return; the department will verify the CAC signature on the returned ballot against the CAC signature on the voter's initial application.

Delivery and timing: officials said local clerks must transmit ballots at least 45 days before election day, consistent with federal law and Michigan practice, and that ballots postmarked by election day may be received up to six days after the election and still be counted. Clerks may begin processing ballots as early as eight days before the election. The department said signature cure provisions will apply when signatures do not match and that, when a CAC-signed ballot is accepted, clerks must duplicate the ballot onto machine-readable paper for tabulation by bipartisan teams of election inspectors.

Security and implementation: the department said it will rely on security requirements set by the Department of Technology, Management, and Budget (DTMB) and that the portal will require users to sign in via the state's MyLogin system; the rules reference DTMB standards rather than attempting to codify specific technical controls so the implementation can adopt updated security measures if needed. The department said it completed an RFP process, has selected a vendor and is preparing to implement the system to meet the statutory date.

Public comment and opposition: the Bureau of Elections reported receiving two public comments during the rulemaking window: one from a township clerk whose feedback the department said had already been incorporated, and written comments from the nonprofit Verified Voting raising security objections. Verified Voting's representative CJ Coles testified by Zoom and said his organization opposes electronic ballot return. Coles told the committee that \"electronic ballot return is considered a high risk activity and that it is actually, difficult, if not impossible, to, secure, electronic ballots,\" and cited national security agencies and scientific groups in support of that view.

Local and military-voter concerns: Shelly Lake, who identified herself as a military spouse and a clerk, told the committee she saw a large increase in overseas voters in her township and urged that the rules explicitly restrict electronic return to military CAC holders. Lake said the draft rules mentioned seven times that the portal could be opened to other voters \"under a future statutory change or court order\" and asked that those references be removed. Several lawmakers, including Senator Runstead, echoed her concern and urged tighter language; Runstead said the phrase \"liberally construed in favor of voters' rights\" and repeated references to authorization by statute or court order could allow expansion beyond the narrowly tailored statute the legislature passed.

Department response: Erin Shore and Adam Fricasse told the committee they intend to implement the statute as written and that the broader language was included to preserve the department's ability to respond if a court order or future statute changes eligibility (for example, ADA accommodations granted in other states). Fricasse said some of the language reflects experience responding to rapid court orders in prior litigation and is intended to provide an operational framework if a court or statute changes requirements.

Numbers and process: Bureau officials told the committee Michigan had roughly 16,000 military and overseas civilians eligible for UOCAVA protections in the November 2024 general election; the department did not provide a breakdown between active military and other overseas civilians. Officials also reiterated that duplication is required because the printed PDF of an electronically returned ballot must be transferred to a ballot format the tabulators can read; that transfer is done by bipartisan teams and audited in recounts.

Next steps and unresolved questions: committee members pressed the department for clarity on the meaning of phrases such as \"authorized by statute or court order,\" the department's choice to use a state portal rather than encrypted email, and how clerks and county canvass boards will ensure the integrity and secrecy of ballots during duplication and processing. Department staff said they would provide additional data and work with clerks and the committee on implementation details before the statutory implementation date.","Department of State officials told the committee they began drafting rules to implement Public Acts 196 and 197 (2022) that will allow eligible uniformed service members to electronically return ballots using a Department of Defense Common Access Card (CAC); speakers and public commenters raised security concerns and warned rule language could be","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Michigan agency tells committee Part 10 air testing rules are largely housekeeping updates

Michigan rules for electronic ballot delivery and CAC-only electronic return draw security and scope objections