The Sunset Commission met on June 22 to consider possible action on recommendations for the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board, Texas Invasive Species Coordinating Committee, Texas Water Development Board, State Water Implementation Fund for Texas, and the San Antonio River Authority.

Additionally, this report covers discussions on the Sunset’s recommendations for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Commission. An archive of this hearing can be found here.

 

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

 

Opening Comments

  • Chair Schwertner – TJJD is a troubled agency; need to have serious discussions on how things need to change
  • Chair Schwertner – Rep. Landgraf and Sen. Miles, and Rep. Walle joined the Commission today
  • Perry – Are TCEQ recommendations from Sunset that I, and the agency, have concerns about; Sunset Agency needs to remember they are fact finders and we are the policy makers
  • Chair Schwertner – Written comments can be submitted until June 27

 

Consideration and Possible Action on the Recommendations

Texas State Soil and Water Conservation BoardTexas Invasive Species Coordinating Committee

  • Sunset recommendations adopted: 2.1, 2.2, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5
    • Recommendations are adopted
  • 1.1 modification by Perry – to include requirement they update 10-year plan to align with application for 1.2
    • 1.1 modification adopted
  • 1.1 Modification by K. Bell – Changes to the dam structure program; agency to have discretion for local match
  • Johnson – Expanded authority regarding size of local match; broaden the discretion to require higher than 1.5% match?
    • Bell – Not the intent; intent is to remove that match
  • Johnson – Aware of wavier size where it is a serious impediment to meet the 1.75% match?
    • Bell – Yes, waive funds in certain cases; intent for the match to go down, not up
    • 1.1 modification adopted
  • 1.1 as modified adopted
  • 1.2 Holland modification – Direct board to updated dam ; implementation date board to report to the commission Jan 1 2023
    • 1.2 modification adopted
  • 1.2 as modified adopted
  • 1.3 Holland modification – centralized master file system for the dam structural repair grants; implementing documentation process by January 1, 2023
    • 1.3 modification adopted
  • 1.3 as modified adopted
  • 1.4 Holland modification – Directed board to approve all grants/projects above $1m; no formal review for these, reporting requirement January 1, 2023
  • Perry – Would require one board member in person and the other via zoom
  • Austin – Timeframe grants need to be utilized?
    • Perry – Contracts have engineering studies that have timelines built into them
    • 1.4 modification adopted
  • 1.4 as modified adopted
  • 1.5 Holland modification – Formalized implementation date for the board to actively inform dam cosponsor and sponsors on funding availability; report by January 1, 2023
    • 1.5 modification adopted
  • 1.5 as modified adopted
  • 3.1 Holland – agency back up for a limited scope review of the dam structural repair program; will continue the agency for 12 years, but Sunset will re-examine the agency in 4 years
    • 3.1 modification adopted
  • 3.1 as modified adopted
  • New Recommendation Johnson – Board to add additional reporting requirements, source conservation, total applications/program area, amount awarded, and grant recipients; privacy and confidentiality already built into the agriculture code
    • New recommendation adopted
  • New Recommendation Perry – Pulling down recommendation to add a full-time person to assist with financial matters; will make sure that will be in the agency’s LAR

 

Texas Water Development Board State Water Implementation Fund for Texas

  • Sunset recommendations adopted: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6
  • 2.1 Johnson modification – Agency collects information on why entities why/are not applying; would add water loss audit data and TCEQ enforcement data
    • 2.1 modification adopted
  • Springer – Agency to work with LBB to separately report money and projects awarded to rural and economically disadvantaged communities; will bring a bill next session to address 10%
    • 2.1 modification adopted
  • 2.1 as modified adopted
  • 2.2 Springer modification – Rural and disadvantaged communities need guidance on applying for these funds; EDAP funds to contract with qualified entities to apply for these funds
    • 2.2 modification adopted
  • 2.2 as modified adopted
  • 3.1 Perry modification – Continue SWIFT until 2035
    • 3.1 modification adopted
  • New Recommendation Holland – Update performance measures reported to the LBB; metrics will already be collected by the agency and will streamline the budgeting process
    • Adopted
  • New Recommendation Perry – Require in feasibility review to include certain projects in the state water plan regardless of whether the agency is providing financing; will force actual scoring and conversations with local regional plans involving reservoirs
  • Johnson – Legislative or agency decision on what to do next if no feasibility?
    • Perry – Legislature will have to decide
    • New recommendation adopted
  • New Recommendation Johnson – Consult with office of state climatologists for the state water plan on areas effected by drought
    • New recommendation adopted
  • New Recommendation Canales – Authorizes regional water planning groups can adopt worse than drought conditions on record for planning purposes
    • New recommendation adopted

 

San Antonio River Authority

  • Sunset recommendations adopted: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7
  • New Recommendation Schwertner – Removes section 4-A master plan requirement which is obsolete and redundant
    • New recommendation adopted
  • New Recommendation Johnson – Move fiscal year from July 1 to October 1; better align to their real budget schedule
    • New recommendation adopted

 

Staff Presentations and Public Testimony

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Commission

Robert Romig, Sunset Staff

  • Growing segment TCEQ benefits polluters over environmental wellness
  • Recommends:
  • TCEQ makes policy decisions in an open setting
  • Provide more meaningful public input in permitting process and more transparency in
  • Update certain policies consequences of regulatory violations are the same/updated across the board
  • Legislative update statute to restart environmental flow standards
  • Comprehensive look at water data; appropriate cancellation of water permits
  • updates to TCEQ’s office of public interest council
  • Recommend continuing agency for the next 12 years
  • TLLRWDC performs its functions as intended; recommends extending sunset review date 12 years
  • Perry – Concerned about the scope of these recommendations particularly 1.1 to add an additional public meeting and input to the permitting process
    • Found there was great dissatisfaction with the conversation happening at the existing public hearing; is little room for conversation with the community
  • Perry – What would you envision being included? Scope limited to jurisdictional issues or?
    • Would be limited to the jurisdiction of TCEQ; is giving an opportunity for meaningful public input on what sorts of control technology or geographic placement of buildings
  • Perry – Is part of the concern because site-selection is a local matter; large part of the conversation would be out of the scope of TCEQ
  • Johnson – Additional hearing at the beginning of process could be more efficient?
    • Was the intention; would be a more informal conversation and TCEQ could state that things out of their scope would not be addressed
  • Johnson – If we implemented this, would need to tailor it; share some of Perry’s concerns
    • Could be limited in scope/nature; would only occur if is significant public interest
  • Chair Schwertner – Delay that might occur with an additional hearing?
    • Would add additional staff work, but would not meaningfully extend the time of process
  • Chair Schwertner – Would only be applicable to certain permits, not to temporary structures like concrete batch plants?
    • Correct; would not apply to water right permits
  • Perry – Not hearing industry asking for this; are already inclusive in drafting the permit
  • Perry – Anything administratively to do by statute that would be different because public has the opportunity to discuss on the front end? Need to trust TCEQ is doing their job
    • Protectiveness would not change
  • Miles – Did not find anywhere in statute TCEQ was responsible for sustainable economic development? Prioritize economic development over the health and safety of our people?
    • Is a part of the agency’s adopted mission statement
  • Chair Schwertner – Proposed changes to the RN rating are dramatic; is that something Sunset should do or the legislature?
    • Analyze the agency’s risk-based decision making; origins to compliance rating were recommended last Sunset cycle
    • All recommendations is to leave the decision making to TCEQ; Sunset assessed how the formula is working, and it is not serving its purpose
  • Chair Schwertner – Complexity of formula?
    • Current way the formula works is that complexity is seen as positive
  • Perry – TCEQ is a resource first, enforcement second; changing the formula will lead to industry not looking to TCEQ for help
  • Canales – Sunset needs to streamline information on their website
  • Canales – Recommendations to timely review certain transportation permits?
    • Heard complaints from TCEQ is struggling with staff attrition and resources
    • Have a hard time keeping engineers who review those permits
  • Canales – Outside contracting and more FTEs would help?
    • Are using outside contracting already where they can, can only get so far
    • Clarity on what they should/should not look at could help
  • Holland – Elaborate how agency classifies RN violation and Sunset recommendation?
    • Intention is to not increase enforcement actions; intention for the agency to consider information the appropriate weight given to that formula
  • Austin – Agencies, particularly TCEQ, should post more online notices of hearings
  • Austin – Should better define that promise in responsiveness timeline
  • Austin – Engineers working remotely could be assigned to another part of the state other than Austin
  • Perry – Have pushed for that last one; big issue with 1.3 intention to expand what an “effective party” is? Do not want to hamstring the agency
    • No; if it is poor writing, will change that
    • Commissioners have been clear that the one-mile rule does not effectively exist
    • Recommendation intends to be clear on guidance
  • Perry – Recommendation about uniform effective parties in discharge plants; are differences in each case
  • Canales – TERP provides rebates to those with electric vehicles; current paper process is inefficient, would make it more efficient to be all online?
    • Could be considered; also had concerns about the application deadline
    • Did not feel like it was in Sunset’s purview
  • Springer – Lay out problem on compliance monitoring reducing on nuisance complaints; but have no recommendations? Saw this issue 12 years ago? What has changed?
    • Sunset defers on the legislature and agency on this issue
    • Growth in development and industrial operations near new developments or vice-versa
  • Springer notes TCEQ is getting multiple complaints at one time; taxpayer should bare the cost of these frivolous complaints; should be a three-strike policy?
  • Johnson – Speak on if Sunset is going outside their purview; are not attempting to have major enforcement on those with minor infractions?
    • Correct; is information the agency already has at their disposal
  • Chair Schwertner – Are recommending changing complexity score; is a matter of how much we want Sunset to change what TCEQ does on a regular basis; will discuss more
  • Chair Schwertner – Concerning cancellation of water rights after non-use for 10 years; other section of the code says they “may” consider cancellation; TCEQ does not agree with this recommendation
    • Interpretation of code is to say legislature has directed this is a program TCEQ must have and “may” language says it is up to the agency’s analysis to cancel when appropriate
    • TCEQ has noted they are not actively cancelling water rights, Sunset felt they were not meeting statute
  • Bell – 2.5 was a direction to develop clear guidance to evaluate affirmative defense? Current process was held up by federal court
    • Is guidance to their own staff; staff felt uncomfortable when it should/should not be approved
    • Agency identified this need and are already working on guidance
  • Perry – Language concerning water rights will be dealt with next legislative session; will change to “may”
  • Perry – Reasoning behind Sunset’s PGMA recommendation? Studies are available to the public?
    • Concern is whether a study is done or not
  • Perry – Cannot imagine creating such sweeping changes to water rights; is a legislative decision and Sunset is overstepping their bounds
  • Miles – Reads a statement; is a disproportionate amount of environmental/health hazards on people of color and the economically disadvantaged such as the concrete batch plants in SD13
    • Should deny permits based on cumulative effects to communities
    • Fighting a concrete batch plant being built across the street from another in SD13
    • Contested case hearing process is broken; need to adopt a broader right for the public to bring cases
    • Should adopt all Sunset recommendations; TCEQ needs to have the ability to levy fines
    • Should remove the affirmative defense and increase review of TCEQ to every 6 years
  • Walle – Constituents are suffering from the proliferation of concrete batch plants
    • Beat a concrete batch plant permit in the past due to public pressure, not due to TCEQ denying the application
    • Process needs to change for the public and stakeholders to submit their concerns
    • Need to change enforcement and do more for TCEQ’s budget for enforcement
    • Have limited our local governments from regulating these industries

 

Chairman Jon Niermann, TCEQ

  • Sunset report acknowledges limited staff, resources, and TCEQ’s scope and ability to approve controversial projects
  • Johnson – An issue with public awareness on deadlines to submit public comments?
    • Sunset staff recommendation was to create a guidance document; can do that
    • Can make these known to the public
  • Johnson – Asks about concrete batch plant permits
    • Conducting protective reviewing on if concrete batch plant permits should be renewed
  • Johnson – Can get information on public participation to Sen. Alvarado’s office
    • Yes; have several different procedural rules applying to permits and public participation
  • Johnson – Agency recognizes advantage in clarity of requirements; confusion concerning set-back requirements
    • Yes; is currently subjective standard standing review is consistent with Article III analysis
  • Holland and Niermann discusses the current public input process; EPA and other states allow public to appeal permit after it is final, Texas allows input before it is final
  • Holland – What statutorily does TCEQ have to do considering public input? Is it taken into account for the approval of the permit?
    • Requirements are set in statute and some are set by federal requirements
  • Springer – Uptick in nuisance complaints; how to address?
    • Agree with Sunset’s recommendation and have guidance that triages complaints that come in; some have lower priority
    • Do not know if a solution would be statutory
  • Springer – Issues can sometimes be transportation; people feel that TCEQ is the only place they can complain
    • Want to direct enforcement resources where the greatest risk is
  • Chair Schwertner – Speaking for Senfronia Thompson; wants her constituents here
  • Bell – Asks about dual notice and comment period
    • Certain types of authorizations allow for contested cases/pubic hearings some do not
    • Sunset recommendations apply for those with two notices; need to be careful that we are solving the problem they are identifying
  • Bell – Are already following EPA requirements?
    • Yes, and do more than are required
  • Bell – Any other states do the contested hearing process?
    • Do not know of any
  • Chair Schwertner – Sunset recommendations concerning RN rating?
    • Right now those that have more compliance points is seen as a positive
    • Is a choice by the legislature to determine if this is a negative
  • Chair Schwertner – Title 5 permit?
    • Intended to gather all requirements applying to major facilities; not intended to impose new requirements but gathers up state/federal requirements into one place
  • Johnson – Change RN rating formula result in unreasonable burden on the agency? A benefit?
    • If changed the mathematical formula would emphasize minor violations more, is more punitive, do not know if this would lead to more compliance
    • Do not see the benefit, but see the costs to the agency
  • Johnson – Are addressing Sunset recommendations elsewhere?
    • Yes; especially concerning repeat violator status and refer repeat violations to the AG
  • Holland – Years ago TCEQ adopted rules concerning petroleum storage tanks; due to updates in technology rules could be obsolete; other things working on?
  • Toby Baker, TCEQ Executive Director – Working on that issue internally; could get done before next session
  • Austin – What can the state do in terms of efficiency place of the federal government?
    • Most has already been done
  • Austin – Online notices?
    • Will require statutory change; good idea
  • Austin – Positions for remote staff outside of Austin?
    • Are doing that in a flex schedule with some exceptions; are sensitive to that issue
  • Austin – Self reporting entities annually and site visits every 3-4 years; inconsistencies across facilities and want to look at that
  • Austin – When is the right time to remove leak monitoring technology on wells/gas tanks? Need to look at that so we can close things up and move resources to more important things
    • Is a federal process to move from remediation to a closure phase
  • Austin and Niermann discuss TCEQ’s mission statement
  • Austin – Do not California my Texas
  • Springer – Are engineering opportunities outside of Austin; a part of interim charges to move job opportunities to other parts of the state
  • Springer – Would like to visit on you and your staff to make a resolution concerning federal remediation closure phases
  • Clardy – Concerned about RN formula changes; what can you do to show equal treatment, disparity in treatment between regions/different investigators is a budgetary issue
    • Emission event reviews are now centralized
    • Toby Baker, TCEQ Executive Director – Have been working on that last couple years and are centralizing an affirmative defense team
  • Clardy – Concerned about the move to hyper focus on minor infractions
    • Concerned more FTEs will have to look at violations
  • Clardy – May provide a recommendation on the informal dispute resolution process since historically is “toothless”
    • Most are resolved through agreed orders
  • Clardy – On Austin’s comments on continual monitoring; a way to trigger a stop?
  • Clardy – Issues dealing with propriety owned property rights and water rights are best left legislatively
    • Agency response includes number of unused water permits are miniscule
    • Would use a lot of state resources to litigate these matters; agree it would be a legislative decision and the market can take care of this problem
  • Canales – Agreed orders are not typically collaborative
    • Is an opportunity for negotiation; give a credit for prompt/early settlement
  • Johnson- Cost for IT? Would be significant
    • Want to do a better job communicating with the public; are in the middle of millions of IT upgrades to get off of legacy software
  • Miles and Niermann discuss the agency’s addition to consider “sustainable” economic development
  • Miles – See a problem exists with the permitting of concrete batch permits in Harris County in communities of color? It is environmental racism
    • Acknowledge the history of discrimination that is still reflected in urban landscape; not sure what to say about environmental racism
    • Agency does not do site selection; siting locations are based on economics
    • Not sure how to answer this question; if there is correlation with communities and regulated industry, will take your word for it
  • Miles – Environmental racism is the disproportional impact in communities of color and institutional rules due to land use; why there are over 400 people to speak on this
  • Miles – Union Pacific
  • Miles – What do you say to the Sunset Commission that the reception of TCEQ is they work for industry?
    • Report says the public says we are just a rubber stamp and
  • Canales – Goal is to promote health and safety, but we have concrete batch plants near schools and retirement homes
  • Canales – Have said you cannot do anything about this, what do you do then?
    • Monitoring; working to ensure communities are safe, but are precluded by law to do site selection
  • Chair Schwertner – Houston has zoning?
    • Walle – Have very “lax” zoning and in Houston and Dallas have large unincorporated areas
  • Holland – Scientific protectiveness review? Last time criteria was revised?
    • Doing now for concrete batch plants; do not have a schedule and is triggered by developments
  • Holland – How often is your map updated and red dots are all active plants?
    • Staff prepared that map for Miles
  • Landgraf – Proposed a couple items last legislative session; what steps has the agency taken to increase meaningful public participation
    • Toby Baker, TCEQ Executive Director – Plain language summary of permit applications in other languages
  • Landgraf – Number of vacancies in the agency?
    • When announced return to work dropped from 200 to over 400 out of 2.8k
  • Landgraf – Thanks TCEQ to work to handle water crisis in Odessa

 

Chairman Brandon Hurley, Texas Low Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Commission

  • Regulate the importation to the facility in Andrews County and the export of waste
  • Have a problem with the ability to enforce rules
  • In contingency plan if current operator ever exited the scene, is no pathway forward for that
  • Austin asks Hurley to discuss low level radioactive waste

 

Public Testimony

Larry Bailey, Office of Kyle Biedermann

  • Previously brought issue of air quality in district to TCEQ; has not been addressed in 5 years
  • Has been a culture created by the legislature on what TCEQ cannot do
  • Should allow the county to decide the location of concrete batch plants
  • Clardy – What solutions?
    • If there is a funding problem regarding could use the EPA and CDC to assist in permit applications
    • Have strong evidence that property and houses are not selling due to APOs
  • Clardy – Adding roadblocks to the permitting process is not something we want to do; have to balance interests
    • Issue is people’s health; need real-time air quality data
  • Johnson – Reading Sen. Alvarado’s statement concerning issues in Harris County created by concrete batch plants

 

Rachel Jordan, Texas Health and Environment Alliance

  • Public meetings are for the community, not the agency
  • The 5th ward has had an ongoing dispute with Union Pacific; need to continue mail notices and continue in-person meetings

 

Mark Vickery, Texas Association of Manufacturers

  • Agree with Sunset’s observation that TCEQ does its job
  • Agree agency can do better interacting with the public

 

Lasaro, Texas Health and Environment Alliance

  • TCEQ current state superfund site on the cheapest feasible remedy
  • TCEQ should include the following requirements based on selection criteria from the federal cleanup action overall protection of health and environment, alternatives, reduction of toxicity, community acceptance; all criteria from federal cleanup action

 

Monica Ward, Self

  • Representing Erath County; discusses their closed SOA hearing concerning environmental concerns from the dairy in Erath County that does not a permit in this county

 

Mark Fresianhein, Self and TRAM

  • Previously gave Sunset staff 64 recommendations; current report falls short
  • TCEQ is broken and needs to be fixed; Commissioners have become reluctant regulators and need to swing back to their core mission

 

Hector Rivero, Texas Chemical Council

  • Report makes numerous inaccurate assertions; oppose recommendations the legislature mandate public hearings
  • Disagree with Sunset’s characterization of site complexity and concerning TCEQ’s affirmative defense program
  • Austin – How will report help/hurt this industry?
    • $70b invested in the industry in this state since 2010; already have robust processes in place and are competing against other states who promise to get permits faster
  • Bell – How extra meeting would impact permitting process?
    • Will force agency to lengthen permitting timeline
  • Springer – Nuisance complaints effecting industry? Is something that is a concern
    • Support the agency managing nuisance complaints; members want to comply

 

Jimmy Carlisle, Fasken Oil & Ranch

  • Remain opposed to the disposal of greater than Class C waste; continuously challenging NRC’s license application

 

Jennifer Walker, National Wildlife Federation

  • Strongly support recommendation 3.1
  • Support the creation of an environmental flows advisory group and their work plan

 

Erich Birch, Lake Conroe Association

  • TCEQ has failed to enforce rules to protect the environment and health of people
  • Discusses the issues the Lake Conroe Association has had with TCRQ

 

Alex Ortiz, Lonestar Chapter of Sierra Club

  • Are backloads on the total maximum daily load program projects
  • Should auditing effectiveness of program and priority setting criteria
  • Surface water quality standards should be updated frequently

 

Dr. Margo Griffin, Friends of Hondo Canyon

  • TCEQ does not assess their mistakes in issuing permits and does not publish science backing up their permitting process; discusses a case concerning Hondo Canyon

 

Jack Olivei, Self

  • TCEQ has problems due to too little emphasis on natural science and too much emphasis in economic development

 

Susie Bell, Self

  • Concerned about the pending EPA application concerning the storage of radioactive waste
  • Needs stronger regulation from the Compact Commission and TCEQ

 

Jennifer Quick, Livable Arlington

  • Most drill sites in Arlington do not have to reapply for permits and have no accountability
  • Recommend TCEQ consider neighborhood impacts before permits are issues, look at saturation of permits in that area, inform the neighborhood, provide 24-hour air monitoring at the site

 

Rita Bevey, Self

  • Agree with Sunset’s recommendations
  • Big problem is the lack of inspections and what categories of permitted entities get inspected
  • Provides an example of a superfund site that has not been inspected since 2006

 

Ryan S, Self

  • Overviews the details of a quarry in being dropped in an existing residential area; need to use common sense and consult with TRAM

 

Lon Burnam, Self

  • Former house member; anyone who claims the agency is successful is not looking at the overall picture
  • Many, including the Governor, are against bringing radioactive waste into the state
  • Compact Commission does not have enough power or a contingency plan

 

Steven Albright, Associated General Contractors of Texas

  • AGC does not oppose recommendation 1.1, but agree that if we are going to have additional meetings they need to be limited to TCEQ’s scope
    • Ask this does not delay the timeline
  • Agree with recommendation 2.3 relating to temporary sites
  • Austin – Temporary facilities are only used for road construction, etc.?
    • Correct
  • Austin – How many temporary facilities permitted around the state?
    • Do not know exactly; is significant

 

Paul Difiroa, Save Our Springs Alliance

  • MOA between EPA and TCEQ that delegates TCEQ to oversee the Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System; TCEQ frequently violates this MOA
  • Need to include recreational interest in “effected persons” and to follow federal law

 

Dave Banel, Self

  • Have been in a 4-year battle with Liberty Hill and TCEQ
  • Concern is that TCEQ commissioners can overrule the SOA judge’s ruling; legislature should consider changing this

 

Myron Hess, National Wildlife Association

  • Support recommendation 3.1 concerning adaptive management aspects for flow needs
  • Groups should not be abolished every 10 years, but should be continued
  • Austin – Think this advisory group would actually provide meaningful input? Something staff could just do?
    • Very valuable; fundamental is the regional aspect

 

Adrian Shelley, Public Citizen

  • Surveyed people on the TCEQ and main points from those surveys were: environmental justice, permits, cumulative impacts, etc.
  • Agree with recommendation 1.1 with adding that public meeting

 

Ken Jordan, Friends of San Saba

  • More than 1/3rd spoke about environmental justice concerns, many spoke about aggregate concerns, lack of enforcement, etc.
  • Agree with many things in Item 1, incl. 1.1 having public hearing earlier, establishes relationship between applicant and the community
  • Agree with 1.5 to put permits on the websites
  • Big omission in environmental justice & cumulative impacts

 

Ken Jordan, Friends of San Saba 

  • TCEQ has not protected vested property rights of people owning the ranches on the San Saba River; don’t have staff to go after those drilling wells near to the river and lowering the river flows
  • Should make sure alluvial well withdrawal is prohibited, should need permit or it gets shut down

 

Milann Guckian, Preserve Our Hill Country Environment 

  • Fully support and appreciate TRAM’s work on identifying key issues with TCEQ and aggregate industry operators
  • Ultimate goals are equitable solutions between TCEQ, industry, and communities
  • Need to look at affected person standards in recommendation 1.3

 

Laura Hunt, Midlothian Breathe 

  • Member of TRAM, Appreciates Sunset staff for incorporating many recommendations in the report
  • Family was affected by poor air quality in Midlothian

 

Katherine Romans, Hill Country Alliance 

  • In Hill Country region rate of growth is not being paced by appropriate county authority
  • Current TCEQ permitting process is not protective of pristine streams
  • Share concerns about recommendation 3.3 cancellation of water rights
  • Monitoring and enforcement of permit violations is fundamental part of TCEQ, needs ability to raise fines and put more monitoring equipment

 

Jane Boisard, Midlothian Breathe 

  • Organized public groups should be part of the public process
  • Monitor placement is crucial, data collected upwind of polluters is not useful
  • TCEQ needs powers as in the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, ability to control concrete batch plants
  • Best practices for APOs should be reviewed every 5 years

 

Peter Luthiger, Oncor Energy, Texas Mining & Reclamation Association 

  • Support efforts to ensure TCEQ staffing is adequate incl. for timely permit approvals
  • TCEQ statutes don’t establish application timelines for uranium mining applications, applicants need certainty

 

Tommy Wan, City of Houston District F 

  • Many communities in the area suffer from concrete batch plants, air quality is poor in many zip codes, waterway has chromium and mercury contamination
  • Pollution due to permits and superfund sites in the area

 

Danielle Goshen, National Wildlife Federation

  • Should bring contested case hearing process up as an additional Sunset issue, legislature prohibited other agencies from contesting and limited ability of TPWD and others from providing their perspective
  • Restoring agency ability could be done by removing 2011 language added to Water Code

 

Josh Leftwich, Texas Aggregate & Concrete Association 

  • TCEQ is one of 15 state, local, and federal entities that regulate industry
  • Should look at compliance history for meaningful noncompliance factors
  • TCEQ is currently undertaking a permit review at request of industry
  • TACA supports Sunset review of TCEQ

 

Barbara Cones, Self 

  • Appreciates TCEQ publication of landfill municipal solid waste
  • TCEQ should ask that landfills report tonnage on their websites

 

Cyrus Reed, Sierra Club 

  • Signed on to comments by Adrien Shelley with Public Citizens
  • Agree with many of the recommendations, but they don’t go far enough
  • Not confused about TCEQ’s job or purpose, has not met job of meeting air and water quality standards around the state
  • Agree with compliance history changes, but need to look at overall levels of those penalties as they haven’t changed in 15 years
  • Need physical inspections and paper review
  • Concerned about narrow interpretation of affected persons
  • Need to have a “no means no” policy, need applicants to start over if they don’t meet reqs

 

Diedre Diamond, Resident of Gunter 

  • Everything wrong with TCEQ is happening in Gunter Texas
  • 11 permitted concrete batch plants within 1 mile in Gunner, many facilities with no permit transparency, permitting is failing
  • TCEQ permits do not address background pollution like increased truck traffic, need to address cumulative impact

 

Natalie Diamond, Resident of Gunter 

  • 11 permitted concrete batch plants in Gunter, students have to live with pollution & TCEQ keeps permitting plants that pollute air and water

 

Sarah Utley, Harris County Attorney’s Office 

  • TCEQ penalty power is insufficient, statute hasn’t been updated in 20 years
  • On compliance history, TCEQ should evaluate how it could incorporate pollution violations documented by local entities

 

Sofia Foster, Resident of Round Rock 

  • Notice of all permit applications should be posted online, current notice population is very small

 

Steve Shannon, State of Texas Alliance for Recycling 

  • TCEQ is obligated to manage solid waste and promote recycling, not doing its job
  • Recycling only 27% of municipal solid waste, 25% contamination rate in collected recyclables; recycling industry has large positive economic impact

 

Eric Allmon, Ingleside on the Bay Coastal Watch Association 

  • Current statutes prohibit citizens from presenting modeling to TCEQ on impact of permittees
  • Internet posting of applications would facilitate public participation

 

Becky Smith, Clean Water Action 

  • TCEQ should take cumulative impacts into consideration
  • TCEQ should recognize climate science
  • Water permit should include strict nutrient limits

 

Gladys House, Resident of Houston 

  • TCEQ is not fulfilling mission of quality of life for residents of Northeast Houston, Union Pacific Railroad has polluted the area
  • TCEQ is not giving information on contracts with a company in Houston related to vehicle inspections

 

Luke Metzger, Environment Texas 

  • Pollution is a mater of life and death, climate change is causing billions in damage, much of the pollution fueling these problems is illegal
  • Highlights suit against ExxonMobil where they were found violating thousands of regulations
  • Support mandatory minimum fines, eliminating affirmative defense loophole

 

Cathy Blueford Daniels, Self 

  • TCEQ is broken, should be reviewed every 5-6 years instead of 12 years
  • Many are forced to live in specific locations, subject to pollution in the areas they can afford
  • Bitmap should be done annually and be placed n the internet

 

Jeff Brawn, Self 

  • Property in Bandera County is on a river segment classified as one of 22 remaining pristine streams
  • TCEQ should be responsive to public concerns, signed letter to TCEQ asking that wastewater discharge not be allowed into the pristine streams
  • Support recommendation for two public meetings to be held on proposed permits before draft is approved

 

Caroline Hailey, Self 

  • Concerned about new concrete plant in Northeast Houston neighborhood nearby churches and schools

 

Carol Degene, Self 

  • Water is contaminated in unincorporated area of Northeast Houston
  • Stabilization plant moved into area in 2014, weren’t notified by TCEQ at all, only became aware when construction started; TCEQ did not adequately investigate

 

Eric Ross, Self 

  • TCEQ needs authority to consider cumulative effects of polluting facilities
  • TCEQ should be reviewed every 6 years instead of 12

 

Sandra Hopper Scott, Self 

  • Should listen to the witnesses, communities of color are being negatively impacted by polluting facilities; often residents have no choice but to live in these communities

 

Marilyn Ray, Self 

  • TCEQ permitted liquid propane gas facility in Southwest Crossing neighborhood, did not offer a public hearing
  • TCEQ’s job is not to be a rubber stamp for big business

 

Sandra Harper Scott, Self

  • Asks the commission to listen to those who are voicing their experiences and to consider the facts
  • Commission needs to help

 

Marilyn Rae, Self

  • From Houston; CenterPoint liquid propane gas facility was built in my neighborhood
  • TCEQ is charged with protecting the people and the environment, not with rubber stamping facilities for multi-billion-dollar companies
  • TCEQ did not solicit the public to build this facility

 

Kenneth Burgess, Self

  • Survivor of an explosion of a chemical plant in Houston in the 1980s
  • Propane gas facilities in my neighborhood

 

Rae Thompson, Self

  • TCEQ should deny permits to companies like CenterPoint who build these facilities in our neighborhoods

 

Adam Bird, Self

  • Discusses the concrete batch plants in the 3rd Ward
  • Recommend TCEQ or Sunset Commission to have public comment meetings before and after permits are allowed; should consider reducing Sunset cycle to 6 years

 

Erica Hubbard, Self

  • 3rd ward concrete batch plants among other harmful facilities
  • Stunning the TCEQ commissioner did not know what to say about environmental racism as it is recognized by the EPA and the White House
  • TCEQ has failed to take the steps to protect the citizens of Texas

 

Carl Davis, Houston Society for Change

  • TCEQ has turned their backs on those less fortunate by approving concrete batch plants in underserved communities with healthcare and air quality concerns

 

Gloria Ruback, Self

  • From Houston; 17k people a year in Texas are killed by fossil fuel pollution
  • TCEQ favors corporations over our health; those living in East Houston have higher rates of death and health problems than those in West Houston

 

Deborah Walker, Sunnyside Community Redevelopment Organization

  • Long-COVID survivor which greatly effects the respiratory system
  • 149 concrete batch plants in Houston; recommend TCEQ have the authority to observe the cumulative effects
  • Should increase the Sunset cycle to every 6 years

 

Sylvester Reeder, Self

  • TCEQ should have the same vigilance to remediate closed landfills as they do with brownfields

 

Andrea Randreros, Self

  • Provides testimony concerning a mechanical plant being built in her community
  • TCEQ should do better so communities do not have to wait 30 years for them to investigate

 

Julia Ranjel, ARISE Adelante

  • Provides testimony about PSB chemicals produced by the facilities in their community

 

Isbella Esparza, ARISE Adelante

  • Have gas and chemical lines through the neighborhood; damages the environment and our health
  • TCEQ should investigate these companies to see if they are meeting standards and provide information to the public in both English and Spanish

 

Shirley Ronquillo, Houston Department of Transformation

  • TCEQ is a reluctant regulator and residents report health due to concrete batch plants in the community
  • Need to monitor pollution levels and should recognize the diversity of our state by adopting consistent communication plan to the communities these plans would affect

 

Ruben Salazar, Self

  • Regularly see TCEQ favoring industry over the health of communities
  • Prioritizing economic development diminishes the priority of people’s health
  • Concrete batch plant is proposed to be built in my community next to a park

 

Nellie Ronquillo, Self

  • Resident of East Algin and a retired teacher
  • TCEQ is not protecting communities of color; need to eliminate restrictions on who can bring complaints

 

Lolita Retena, Self

  • Resident of RGV and area is subject to flooding; TCEQ needs to increase community outreach

 

Manuel Ronquillo, Self

  • Resident of East Algin; TCEQ remove “sustainable economic development” removed from mission statement
  • 9th cement plant being opening in my community near two schools

 

Maria Isabel Cadrahal, Self

  • Lived in East Algin; ask the cement batch plants not be allowed near
  • TCEQ should be allowed to measure the pollution of all the permits they approve

 

Maria Garcia, Self

  • Resident of East Algin; ask TCEQ put limits on the cement plants being opened especially those in my community

 

Bolivar Fraga, Self

  • Echo the remarks from Sen. Miles and Rep. Walle; TCEQ practices poor permitting

 

Maria Pelligrini, Self

  • Discusses the concrete batch that is to be opened near a park in her community; community already has so many health risks due to the other facilities in the area

 

Josia Whitey, Self

  • 8 cement batch plants within a 5-mile radius; one more has been approved
  • Economic interest of polluters should come second before the health of Texans

 

Noberto Moreno, Self

  • Concerned about the comments made earlier particularly: that it is easier to pass a kidney stone than to get a permit and that ADR’s were toothless and delay things
  • It has been too long without change and without accountability

 

Rosal Hernandez, Self

  • TCEQ should regulate the number of concrete batch plants in one area, should increase fines, monitor air quality, and consider the community over economic development

 

Joshua Moreno, Self

  • Ask for less batch plants in their community due to the amount of pollution in their community

 

Connie Esparza, Self

  • On the Aldine Board of Trustees; public and environmental health should be the deciding factor on the issuance of permits
  • Existing plants need more oversight to ensure compliance

 

Norberto Moreno, Self

  • Leaders continually ignore and deny climate science; should not decide my health

 

Amedeo Moreno, Self

  • Need to take action on the number of polluters in the community

 

Noe Moreno, Self

  • TCEQ should have pertinent information on air quality and similar metrics that is available online

 

Dr. Brian, Texas Oil and Gas Association

  • Agree need to update TCEQ’s website and are concerned about the administrative burden of an additional public hearing; facilities are likely to locate elsewhere if the process is more arduous
  • Discusses the agency could limit time spent on nuisance complaints
  • Austin – Have examples of cases where companies have picked other states due to an increased permitting timeline?
    • Do not have particular examples, but Louisiana often tells industry they can get permits easier there
  • Austin – What did the Sunset report not address?
    • Is a misconception that TCEQ does not have protectiveness in mind; TCEQ ensures all permits meet state and federal requirements

 

Rick Galvan, Self

  • San Antonio has one of the highest rates of asthma and one of the highest rates of ozone pollution
  • TCEQ has taken an important step in increasing oversight in Bexar County
  • Is more TCEQ can do like communicating to communities on what conditions are like and how permits would affect the community

 

Hannah Hughes, Self

  • From San Antonio; many in the community are asthmatic due to two large facilities that create pollution
  • TCEQ could leavy increased fines in order to protect the public from these plants

 

Tatum Owens, Self

  • Vital to prioritize water and air quality over economic development in every part of the state
  • Need to improve monitoring and oversight; should raise fine cap from $25k a day to $50k a day

 

Sandra Edwards, CEER

  • From the 5th ward; the TCEQ is not protecting anyone in our community
  • Need to look into what the public is telling you

 

Barbra McEntire, CEER

  • From Liberty County; black and brown communities are suffering, need the state’s help

 

Era Cinco, CEER

  • From Houston which is disproportionally affected by the negative effects of the pollution in the area

 

Gala Young, CEER

  • From Beaumont and the community is being exposed to pollutants; provides personal anecdote of their family’s health problems
  • Refineries should provide monitors to the community

 

Sarah Davidson, CEER

  • Overviews the high cancer rates in the 5th ward; time for TCEQ to take a stand

 

Kimberly Sanchez, CEER

  • Do not feel safe by Houston’s infrastructure; TCEQ should have inter-agency coordination with TxDOT to use travel demand grants to reduce environmental repercussions

 

John Tamata, Self

  • From East Aldine; overviews the recently approved concrete batch plant in the community near a park

 

Jennifer Hadayia, Air Alliance Houston

  • Take steps to oppose polluters while TCEQ takes steps to approve them
  • Consider ds

 

Zoey Maldanato, Self

  • From Houston and need to hold these industries accountable

 

Bridget Murray, Self

  • Should consider staff recommendations for TCEQ

 

Walter Mallot, Self

  • From the 5th ward; need TCEQ to be for the people

 

Guadalupe Jimenez, Self

  • Need to follow through on the proposed changes to TCEQ

 

Maria Flores, Self

  • Distance requirements between homes and plants is not being enforced
  • Need to closer monitor those in the community

 

Selena Valdez, Self

  • Resident of Aldine and community has been neglected forever; local government is unable to have the authority to choose what businesses are in the community, the state does

 

Ryan DeWitt, Self

  • Concrete batch plans are not being regulated; is a shame to allow this much pollution in our communities

 

Scott Regal, Texas Appleseed

  • Support increased fines for violations, better monitoring of pollution, and more public input
  • Need TCEQ to take environmental justice into their decision making

 

James Trimble, Self

  • Asks for Baker from the TCEQ to talk to the press on the things they have discussed in private
  • Need to really make change

 

Gutierrez, Air Alliance Houston

  • Notes the difficulty in signing up to speak at this committee; especially for those who do not speak English well
  • Do not understand why the TCEQ is allowing the industry to police themselves

 

Closing Comments

  • Springer – Have worked with the concrete batch plants in Gunter; TCEQ has been inspecting and they have always passed air permit qualities
  • Austin – What is the official distance in statute from these facilities to homes and schools?
    • Chair Schwertner – Will get that to you