Print 🖨

The committee on Environmental Regulation met on Feb. 24 and conducted an organizational meeting with invited testimony only. They may have another orientation meeting next week. After opening remarks the committee began hearing from the following invited witness.

Bryan Shaw, Chair of TCEQ

  • Overview given of TCEQ with focus on area issues – Office of Air
  • Ozone
    • Issues include: more stringent federal requirements, incentivize industry adopting new technologies, etc.
    • EPA should look at what Texas is doing well, and aim not to get in the way
    • TERP program is successful – only vehicle to get at mobile sources – the primary source dealing with to meet ozone standards, meet emissions  ($905 million since 2001 awarded)
    • TERP dollars have been expended and never had appropriated dollars without sufficient projects
    • EPA will set standard in October
    • Asthma still concern (but still issue even on low ozone days) and TCEQ working on “better science” to have meaningful process in place
  • Regional Haze
    • Not unusual that Texas is not projected to meet the timeline
    • Believe Texas is making progress
    • Other regulations may impact this number that EPA did not consider
    • TCEQ still giving comments
  • New Source Rules
    • New source rules for coal fire power plants – will be released by EPA at same time for existing coal fire power plants
    • Without new source rule in place, EPA cannot have existing standard in place
    • Details of rulemaking and concerns with the process
    • EPA has stressed wanted to give states ultimate flexibility but in process added additional reductions
    • Rule will go final this summer and states have one year to put plan in place (possible extension)
  • Expedited Permitting Program
    • Started beginning of fiscal year
    • Still working out kinks of program and looking for appropriations moving forward in the future but paid for by those permitees in the program  
  • Other programs reviewed
    • Low level radioactive waste
    • Landfills – current case involving primacy issue of TCEQ and authority of GCD on landfill permit – has huge implications
      • If everyone that had aquifer can so no then will quickly run out of place to site landfills
      • Subchapter D rules – EPA does not know of any issues and rules and processes in place appear to be working/functional
    • Office of Compliance and Enforcement –  great communications and ability to monitor
    • Office of water working diligently to what seems to be
    • a continual drought – asking for additional funding for staff so public water projects can be processed in timely process
  • Rep. Isaac – TERP appropriations are around $77.5 million?
    • Shaw – there is a possibility to add more  
    • Every year have room to apply more grant funding
    • Isaac speaks of delta of what was available and what was requested – yes projects looking for this funding every year

Martha Landwehr, General Counsel for Texas Chemical Council

  • Overview given of Council and industry expansion
  • Factors for where energy will incest range from permitting process to water
  • Need a fair and competitive regulatory structure
  • Can take anywhere from 2 months to several years or longer to achieve permits needed to start construction
  • Would like to preserve the integrity of TERP and maintain adequate funding
  • Rep. Isaac – asked for details on emissions of facilities
    • Will get that detail to him – have information of products and by company
    • TERP more effective in purchase power of emissions

Tom “Smitty” Smith – Alliance for Clean Texas

  • Because of production of resources we have issues today but believe they can be mitigated
  • Fracking issues downside is significant air and water pollution
  • Fracking emitting extraordinary amounts of gas – flares are above stacks that may be getting less than 30% of emissions coming off of them
  • Tanks and waster permits problems – hauling off frac water or some sitting in pits and they leak
  • Eagle Ford shale now produces more NOx than entirety of Bexar County
  • TERP can help solve some issues
  • If permitting done poorly then people can be sickened by emissions coming off the waste pit
  • Five easy solutions were listed in handouts and many can be addressed through TERP
  • TERP is a great program that is extremely cost effective
    • Almost $1 billion in fund balance and if used could make a huge decline in pollutions
    • Need to appropriate funds
    • Highway industry that will say this is highway money – recall when this deal was made and this funding is designed for air pollution and where it needs to stay
    • Provides language to clarify use of TERP funds – emissions reductions for oil and gas in those counties designated by the RRC
  • LIRAP program – roughly 10% of cars cause 80% of pollution problem
    • Program being underfunded – funding should go directly to the counties
  • SOAH – contested cases give citizens fair opportunity to ensure best available technologies are being used
    • Rare they happen but they are for big cases
  • Will hear about permitting process being delayed but we are the top in country for getting out permits
    • Problem often due to incomplete filings
  • Have done study that shows cost of inaction is more than cost of action
  • Handouts make several recommend changes from changing a few words in programs, increase amount of efficiencies in state, etc
  • Recycling – In regards to bag ban and other environmental regulations in cities – 12 cities have established ban because they see the impacts and are remarkably popular
    • Passed a ban in Austin and have seen visible evidence in his own backyard it is working
    • Courts over the years have recognized cities have a right to protect themselves
    • Recycling is working well but need to encourage producers to take back a wide variety of goods
    • Texas rate of recycling is lower compared to other states  
  • Landfills – numerous landfills are leaking and it is a “witches brew of toxic chemicals” getting into water supply and it is unacceptable
  • Radioactive waste – Texas wants to move to high level waste and has concerns – high level waste is extremely deadly
    • A big threat is that of a terrorists  grabbing a convoy of the trucks
    • Process is bad under this administration – Obama is allowing for voluntary host states
    • Nuclear waste act said do science first and then find a place to put it
  • Rep. Thompson asked about chart of landfills and contaminations
    • Used TCEQ and site is listed on first page of handouts
  • Rep. Isaac – any concerns with LIRAP going directly to counties
    • Thinks legislation could be written to get credit back to SIP but flow through TCEQ so funding goes straight to county

Elena Craft, Environmental Defense Fund

  • Texas breathe air that do not meet air quality standards
  • Dallas Medical Assoc. has petitioned TCEQ to help curb top polluters
  • EPA has proposed strengthening the standard
  • Recommendations for Texas
    • Increase TERP funds
    • Common Sense pollution controls
    • Replacing older drilling engines
  • Concerned about air toxic of state – air pollution watch list areas
    • Recommendations: TCEQ more timely in enforcement of violations, larger fines, etc
  • Texas has highest rate of industrial fatalities
    • Recommendations are common sense measures: increase inspections, follow better storage criteria, increase training for emergency responders, etc.
  • TERP funds need to be increased and recommendations of how to do that were listed in the handouts
  • Several standards can be cost effective and business are in the position to adopt and comply with many federal standards

Q&A

  • TCEQ was asked about complaint process – when hauling off fracking waste what is procedure for neighbors who feel health was impacted during that process
    • TCEQ staff said there is a regional office that can be called for complaints and TCEQ office has done outreach