LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE
74th Regular Session
May 3, 1995
TO: Honorable Bill Sims, Chair IN RE: Committee Substitute
Committee on Natural Resources forHouse Bill
Senate No. 2015
Austin, Texas By: Talton
FROM: John Keel, Director
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on House Bill No.
2015 (Relating to statutory changes to obtain delegation to Texas
of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.) this
office has determined the following:
The bill would amend certain Water Code provisions to make them
consistent with federal law and the federal permitting program
for wastewater discharges.
The bill would impose additional eligibility requirements on the
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) and
provide for public intervention or participation in enforcement
proceedings related to wastewater discharges.
The bill would prohibit the TNRCC from increasing wastewater
permit fees for local governments before August 31, 2001.
The bill does not require the TNRCC to incur costs but would
remove potential legal impediments to delegation of a federal
permitting program. The assumption of a federal permitting
program by the TNRCC would have significant cost implications to
the state. The costs identified below are based on an assumption
that the state will seek delegation of the federal programs for
municipal and industrial wastewater, confined animal feeding
operations and municipal pretreatment. These costs do not include
federal delegation of stormwater permitting or sludge operations
or TNRCC entry of compliance monitoring data into the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Permit Compliance System.
The costs associated with state delegation assumes costs would
be recovered from affected permittees under the limitations
imposed by the bill.
State delegation of the federal wastewater program would
eliminate the dual permitting of some facilities and reduce
permitting and compliance costs. However, the subsequent cost
savings to local units of government cannot be determined.
The probable fiscal implication of implementing the provisions of
the bill during each of the first five years following passage
is estimated as follows:
Fiscal Probable Cost to Probable Gain to Change in
Year Water Quality Fund Water Quality Fund Number of State
153 153 Employees from
FY 1995
1996 $2,861,102 $2,861,102 44.0
1997 2,517,102 2,517,102 44.0
1998 2,517,102 2,517,102 44.0
1999 2,517,102 2,517,102 44.0
2000 2,517,102 2,517,102 44.0
Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as the
provisions of the bill are in effect.
The fiscal implication to units of local government cannot be
determined.
Source: Office of the Attorney General, Natural Resource
Conservation Commission
LBB Staff: JK, JB, DF