LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE
75th Regular Session
April 8, 1997
TO: Honorable Warren Chisum, Chair IN RE: House Bill No. 2103
Committee on Environmental Regulation By: Turner, Sylvester
House
Austin, Texas
FROM: John Keel, Director
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on HB2103 ( Relating
to restrictions on the siting of solid waste facilities and
to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission's consideration
of cumulative risks in certain administrative proceedings.)
this office has detemined the following:
Biennial Net Impact to General Revenue Funds by HB2103-As Introduced
Implementing the provisions of the bill would result in a
net impact of $0 to General Revenue Related Funds through the
biennium ending August 31, 1999.
The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal
basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions
of the bill.
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would establish a state policy which would restrict
the siting of solid waste facilities in low-income, minority,
or other communities and would require that any adverse effects
of such facilities on the communities in which they are located
be minimized. In conjunction with this policy, the bill would
require the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC)
to ensure that the state has adequate solid waste management
capacity.
The bill would also require the TNRCC to include
in its report to the legislature and the governor an evaluation
of progress made toward restricting the siting of solid waste
facilities in low-income, minority, and other communities.
The bill would further restrict the siting of a new or the expansion
of an existing solid waste facility within a certain distance
of a church, school, day care center, surface water body used
for public drinking water supply, or a dedicated public park.
The
bill would also require the TNRCC to consider the cumulative
risks of pollutants from a facility for which an application
is pending in an administrative proceeding in combination with
pollutants discharged from other existing facilities in the
area. The bill requires the TNRCC to develop and implement
policies to protect the public from these cumulative risks,
particularly low-income and minority communities, and communities
in which permitted facilities are concentrated.
The provisions
of the bill would take effect September 1, 1997.
Methodolgy
Several provisions of the bill would require additional resources
for implementation by the TNRCC. The agency projects that the
bill would require an evaluation a broad range of potential
chemical interactions, nuisance conditions, other permitted
facilities, and unplanned releases, in addition to normal discharges.
It is estimated that an additional 3 toxicologists and 10 engineering
specialists would be required for toxicological analyses and
modeling to detect any presence of pollutants.
In addition,
the agency anticipates that the requirement to provide specific
information about the siting of solid waste facilities in low-income,
minority, and other communities in solid waste planning activities
will result in an increase in costs for developing the statewide
solid waste plan. Further, the increased complexity of the
siting requirements and the application of those requirements
to facilities currently exempt from permitting would require
an additional staff person to ensure that the facilities meet
the provisions of the bill.
Finally, the agency states
that if the provisions of the bill relating to off-site disposal
were applied to the remediation of superfund sites, additional
costs of $2.6 million in 1998 and $4 million in 1999 would be
realized. However TNRCC did not include these costs in their
fiscal analysis because it is anticipated that these sites would
meet the requirements set forth in Section 361.102 which would
allow the waste to be stored on site with the demonstration
that public health and welfare, and the physical property and
environment would be safeguarded.
The probable fiscal implications of implementing the provisions
of the bill during each of the first five years following passage
is estimated as follows:
Five Year Impact:
Fiscal Year Probable Probable Change in Number
Savings/(Cost) Savings/(Cost) of State
from Clean Air from Solid Waste Employees from
Account/ Disposal Fee FY 1997
GR-Dedicated Account/
GR-Dedicated
0151 5000
1998 ($917,771) ($240,590) 14.0
1998 (830,021) (213,590) 14.0
2000 (830,021) (213,590) 14.0
2001 (830,021) (213,590) 14.0
2002 (830,021) (213,590) 14.0
Net Impact on General Revenue Related Funds:
The probable fiscal implication to General Revenue related funds
during each of the first five years is estimated as follows:
Fiscal Year Probable Net Postive/(Negative)
General Revenue Related Funds
Funds
1998 $0
1999 0
2000 0
2001 0
2002 0
Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as
the provisions of the bill are in effect.
Local governments which operate or are served by solid waste
management facilities may incur increased costs associated with
planning and siting solid waste facilities due to certain provisions
of the bill.
Due to current statutory requirements, one-half
of the annual costs identified above from the Solid Waste Disposal
Fee Account would be distributed to Councils of Governments
in the form of grants.
Source: Agencies: 582 Natural Resources Conservation Commission
LBB Staff: JK ,BB ,MS