COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE HEARING
STATE CAPITOL MAIN BUILDING ROOM 140 HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2020
PRESENTATION FROM DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
BEFORE:
HONORABLE STANLEY SAYLOR, MAJORITY CHAIRMAN HONORABLE MATT BRADFORD, MINORITY CHAIRMAN HONORABLE ROSEMARY BROWN HONORABLE SHERYL DELOZIER HONORABLE GEORGE DUNBAR HONORABLE JONATHAN FRITZ HONORABLE MATT GABLER HONORABLE KEITH GREINER HONORABLE SETH GROVE HONORABLE MARCIA HAHN HONORABLE DOYLE HEFFLEY HONORABLE JOHN LAWRENCE HONORABLE JASON ORTITAY HONORABLE CLINT OWLETT HONORABLE CHRIS QUINN HONORABLE GREG ROTHMAN HONORABLE JAMES STRUZZI HONORABLE JESSE TOPPER HONORABLE JEFF WHEELAND HONORABLE RYAN WARNER HONORABLE MARTINA WHITE
————————— JEAN DAVIS REPORTING POST OFFICE BOX 125 • HERSHEY, PA 17033 Phone (717)503-6568 1 BEFORE (cont.'d):
2 HONORABLE DONNA BULLOCK HONORABLE MORGAN CEPHAS 3 HONORABLE CAROLYN COMITTA HONORABLE AUSTIN DAVIS 4 HONORABLE ELIZABETH FIEDLER HONORABLE MARTY FLYNN 5 HONORABLE EDWARD GAINEY HONORABLE PATTY KIM 6 HONORABLE STEPHEN KINSEY HONORABLE LEANNE KRUEGER 7 HONORABLE STEPHEN McCARTER HONORABLE BENJAMIN SANCHEZ 8 HONORABLE PETER SCHWEYER
9 ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: 10 DAVID DONLEY, REPUBLICAN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 11 RITCHIE LaFAVER, REPUBLICAN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ANN BALOGA, DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 12 TARA TREES, DEMOCRATIC CHIEF COUNSEL HONORABLE MARY JO DALEY 13 HONORABLE PAM DeLISSIO HONORABLE CRIS DUSH 14 HONORABLE DAN FRANKEL HONORABLE JOE HOHENSTEIN 15 HONORABLE MARY ISAACSON HONORABLE SARA INNAMORATO 16 HONORABLE DARYL METCALFE HONORABLE TOM MURT 17 HONORABLE KATHY RAPP HONORABLE GREG VITALI 18 HONORABLE DAVE ZIMMERMAN
19
20
21 JEAN M. DAVIS, REPORTER 22 NOTARY PUBLIC 23
24
25
2 1 I N D E X TESTIFIER 2
3 NAME PAGE
4 PATRICK McDONNELL, SECRETARY 7 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3 1 P R O C E E D I N G S
2 * * *
3 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: I call the
4 Appropriations Committee to order.
5 And I'm going to ask everybody to stand and we're
6 going to do the pledge.
7 (Pledge of Allegiance)
8 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Thank you.
9 Before we start and I swear you in, Mr.
10 Secretary, I'm going to ask every member to introduce
11 themselves.
12 Representative Bradford, do you want to start?
13 MINORITY CHAIRMAN BRADFORD: Thank you, Chairman
14 Saylor.
15 Matt Bradford, Central Montgomery County.
16 REPRESENTATIVE VITALI: Greg Vitali, Delaware and
17 Montgomery Counties.
18 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Austin Davis, Allegheny
19 County, 35th District.
20 REPRESENTATIVE KINSEY: Good morning. Stephen
21 Kinsey, Philadelphia County.
22 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: Good morning also.
23 Steve McCarter, 154th District, Eastern Montgomery County.
24 REPRESENTATIVE GAINEY: Good morning.
25 Ed Gainey, State Representative of the 24th
4 1 Legislative District.
2 REPRESENTATIVE BULLOCK: Good morning.
3 Representative Donna Bullock, 195th District,
4 parts of North and West Philadelphia.
5 REPRESENTATIVE FLYNN: State Representative Marty
6 Flynn, 113th District, Lackawanna County.
7 REPRESENTATIVE FIEDLER: Good morning.
8 State Representative Elizabeth Fiedler, 184th,
9 South Philadelphia.
10 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: Leanne Krueger, 161st
11 District, Delaware County.
12 REPRESENTATIVE SANCHEZ: Good morning, all.
13 I'm Ben Sanchez from Eastern Montgomery County.
14 REPRESENTATIVE KIM: Patty Kim, 103rd District,
15 Dauphin County.
16 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: Good morning.
17 John Lawrence, 13th Legislative District,
18 Southwestern Chester County and a part of Lancaster County.
19 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Good morning.
20 Matt Gabler, 75th District, Elk and Clearfield
21 Counties.
22 REPRESENTATIVE ORTITAY: Good morning.
23 Jason Ortitay, 46th District, Allegheny and
24 Washington Counties.
25 REPRESENTATIVE WHEELAND: Jeff Wheeland, Lycoming
5 1 County, 83rd District.
2 REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Good morning.
3 Rosemary Brown, 189th District, Monroe and Pike
4 Counties.
5 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: Good morning.
6 Marcia Hahn, 138th, Northampton County.
7 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: Jesse Topper, 78th
8 District, Bedford, Fulton, and Franklin Counties.
9 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: Clint Owlett. I serve
10 the 68th District which is Tioga and parts of Bradford and
11 Potter Counties.
12 REPRESENTATIVE ROTHMAN: Good morning.
13 Greg Rothman, the 87th District, Cumberland
14 County.
15 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: Good morning.
16 Keith Greiner, 43rd District, Eastern Lancaster
17 County.
18 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: Jim Struzzi, 62nd
19 District, Indiana County.
20 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: Good morning, friends.
21 Jonathan Fritz proudly representing the 111th
22 District comprising Wayne and Susquehanna Counties.
23 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Seth Grove, 196th
24 District, York County.
25 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: Daryl Metcalfe,
6 1 Chairman of the Environmental Resource and Energy Committee.
2 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: Good morning.
3 George Dunbar, Westmoreland County, 56th
4 District.
5 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: And I'm Representative
6 Stan Saylor, Chairman of the Appropriations Committee.
7 I wanted to also let you know that we have Dave
8 Donley to my left, who is the Executive Director of the
9 Committee, and Ann Baloga, who is the Executive Director for
10 the Democratic Appropriations Committee as well with us.
11 With that, Mr. Secretary, if you would rise and
12 raise your right hand and when I'm done say, I do.
13 Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are
14 about to give is true to the best of your knowledge,
15 information, and belief? If so, say, I do.
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I do.
17 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Thank you.
18 And with that, we'll start our questions this
19 morning. I'm going to start off with Representative
20 Greiner.
21 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
22 Good morning, Mr. Secretary. Thank you for being
23 here.
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good morning.
25 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: We're going to dive
7 1 right into this. This question comes up every year, the
2 permitting situation and the backlog. In reviewing the
3 Governor's Budget Book, each agency has performance measures
4 that they should meet or want to meet. Certainly with my
5 background -- I know Representative Dunbar has worked on
6 this. We want to see positive performance measures. And
7 under the DEP's General Operations, one of the performance
8 measures is to eliminate the historical permit application
9 backlog, something that we make decisions on here about
10 funding.
11 And in the Governor's 2019-'20 Budget Book, the
12 DEP estimated that the fiscal year, that there were 545
13 applications still pending, 545. That was last year when we
14 were here. But now when we look at the Budget Book, we find
15 the actual number that's in the book says 8,715. And in
16 addition to that, there's a letter that you had written to
17 Matt Knittle concerning this. And in this letter it talked
18 about that the backlog was 8,715.
19 First of all, I want to know, was there something
20 tremendously wrong in the estimation last year in the Budget
21 Book that we have to -- you know, we want good numbers
22 ourselves when we make these decisions.
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
24 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: The other thing I will
25 say, too, is that when we made the funding decision to do
8 1 your GOE, the General Operating Expenses, we pretty much
2 funded it at the number that you expected us or wanted us
3 to.
4 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Correct.
5 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: So maybe you can let us
6 know what -- is there something wrong with the estimation?
7 What's going on there?
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I don't have the
9 performance measures from the Budget Book in front of me,
10 but I do know our 2016-'17 number was 8,715. And that was
11 the starting point for us to do a real focus on our backlog
12 management. Now, I know it is down to about 500. And to be
13 blunt, some of that reduction represents better data quality
14 where there were permits issued that weren't being reflected
15 within our system. Some of those are permits that have been
16 issued in the interim. And the 500 that remain, there's
17 either some things we're waiting on from applicants or some
18 litigation issues related to that.
19 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: Being a CPA, you know
20 I'm very detail-oriented.
21 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Right.
22 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: Particularly when you
23 look at things like this, I guess one thing that I did want
24 to bring up in last year's Appropriation's hearings, when we
25 looked at this data, you know, I think there's an
9 1 expectation -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- that we're
2 hoping there would be -- that we'd get caught up, that it
3 would be zero. And then when we look at this year's, you
4 know, the Budget Book, the Executive Budget again, the
5 anticipation is that we will get caught up and be zero again
6 next year.
7 I mean, is that -- are we being realistic when we
8 look at that approach or what would your thought process be?
9 As you just said, it seems like at some point you're waiting
10 for more information. What are your thoughts on that?
11 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I think some of
12 what we've been working through to put in place related to
13 our permitting is clear expectations if we just aren't
14 getting there. And I always point out it's not permits
15 issued, it's permits disposed. So if we're simply not
16 getting the information, one of the things we're having
17 conversations with -- and the applications remain woefully
18 delinquent, like it's okay to deny that application and
19 return it if we're not getting the information we need.
20 The goal is to get us down to zero absolutely in
21 terms of that backlog. And what we are seeing on a
22 year-over-year basis over the last three years is issuing
23 more permits, disposing of more permits each year than we've
24 received which is what's eating away at that balance.
25 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: I think what -- one
10 1 thing -- I mean, anytime we look at data, like I said with
2 being a numbers guy, we want to make the right decisions.
3 Last year the backlog said 545. Now it said -- like it says
4 -- maybe like you said, maybe it's something with the years
5 but it says there was a backlog of 8,715 in the prior year.
6 I'm just letting you know that.
7 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
8 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: And it was a letter to
9 Director Knittle. We need to know that. That worries me
10 because we want to be able to make the right decisions.
11 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: We'll offer
12 clarification back and just make sure that those numbers are
13 --
14 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: Yeah, we're definitely
15 going to need that.
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes, sure.
17 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: The other thing is too,
18 you know, through the whole permitting process, you know,
19 there tends to be a backlog, you know, certainly in my area
20 of south central Pennsylvania. Two things, can you give us
21 the breakdown of the backlog by permit category? Would that
22 be possible to provide this Committee and the Chairman the
23 backlog which permits are there?
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
25 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: And then secondly, of
11 1 course, I'd like to know the regions of the State. I think
2 that's -- I think that's very critical because all I'm going
3 to say is, we continue to hear frustration of people trying
4 to get permits, you know. And living in eastern Lancaster
5 County, we have people going to Maryland. We've lost some
6 businesses, you know, going there because they get
7 frustrated with the permit process at times.
8 So anyway, I see my time is up. I do think it's
9 an area that we need to continue to address because, you
10 know, we're trying to make the right decisions with funding
11 here and this is a big area.
12 Thank you for your time.
13 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
14 And the one thing I would point out is, under our
15 permit decision guarantee, again, from '17-'18 to '18-'19,
16 '17-'18 we were at 93 percent; '18-'19, 95 percent; but
17 notably within that, we had some specific areas like oil and
18 gas was down to 31 percent, now up over 90 percent. Similar
19 movement in water quality, air quality permitting, where
20 we've seen improvement. And specifically within the
21 southwest regional office area, they have eliminated 86
22 percent of the permit backlog within that region.
23 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: If you could provide us
24 that data by region, that would be great.
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
12 1 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: Thank you.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
3 REPRESENTATIVE GREINER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
4 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Next is Representative
5 Patty Kim.
6 REPRESENTATIVE KIM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
7 Welcome back, Mr. Secretary.
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
9 REPRESENTATIVE KIM: We were recently at the same
10 ribbon cutting outside the State Museum where the Mayor
11 unveiled four new electronic vehicle charging stations. I
12 believe that is the direction we need to go. The Mayor said
13 it cost $40,000 from a State Grant.
14 I was wondering if you could tell me where that
15 money comes from, how much more is available, and what is
16 the overall plan for these?
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
18 REPRESENTATIVE KIM: Thank you.
19 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you very
20 much.
21 It's, one, an important example for us to have
22 that here in the Capitol complex. I know there are members
23 who have electronic vehicles who have been looking for
24 someplace to charge those vehicles.
25 We have a couple different funding sources that
13 1 we're using to support electric vehicle infrastructure
2 throughout the state. And some of that is through the
3 Driving Pennsylvania Forward Program. That is, as a
4 reminder, money that we have access to out of the Volkswagen
5 settlement dollars, $118 million.
6 And as part of that, we're doing Level 2 charger
7 rebates. And those chargers that are outside the State
8 Museum are Level 2 chargers. Level 3 is the fast charger.
9 Level 2 is an intermediate. Level 1 is basically you're
10 plugging into your outlet at your house.
11 In addition to that, we're providing rebates
12 through the Alternative Fuel Incentive Grant Program for
13 electric and alternative fuel vehicles. And specifically we
14 have rebates tied to battery electric, plug-in hybrid
15 electric vehicles, as well as natural gas and some other
16 vehicle types within that.
17 REPRESENTATIVE KIM: And then the overall plan in
18 terms of converting regular cars to EVs in the future in
19 your Department?
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
21 So a couple of things. One, in terms of the
22 State itself, we have an electric vehicle roadmap. We
23 worked with Driving Pennsylvania Electric Coalition to
24 develop a roadmap over the last couple of years that has a
25 number of things, some of which we're already acting on,
14 1 particularly on education within that space.
2 I think importantly the Governor's Office,
3 through an Executive Order and establishment of the GreenGov
4 Council, has made a commitment to purchase State vehicles as
5 a Commonwealth, 25 percent by 2025 in fact.
6 And even on our end, I can report we have a
7 number of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles we're already
8 using. When I came into work over the weekend, I saw the
9 Chevy Volt was parked down in our basement so we have our
10 first full battery electric vehicle. And the Secretary's
11 Office has always had a Jeep it seems like. I'll have a
12 Volt within the next couple of weeks I'm using.
13 So I know we're moving in that direction. And I
14 believe that's the direction as a Commonwealth we're moving.
15 I'll say from a budget perspective, you are
16 talking about vehicles that are more expensive. There's
17 infrastructure things we need to think about as well. And
18 it's important we have the Driving PA Forward money now.
19 That's something we can take advantage of to help us offset
20 some of those costs.
21 REPRESENTATIVE KIM: Great. Thank you for your
22 answer.
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
24 REPRESENTATIVE KIM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
25 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Mr. Secretary, if you
15 1 would move the mike a little closer to you just for PCN
2 purposes.
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
4 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Before I start the
5 next questioner, I want to introduce a couple members that
6 have joined us that are not on the Appropriations Committee.
7 We have Representative Rapp who has joined us,
8 Representative Isaacson is here, Representative Mary Jo
9 Daley. Welcome, Mary Jo. Representative Dush and
10 Representative Dave Zimmerman have joined us.
11 With that we will go to our next questioner who
12 is Representative Marcia Hahn.
13 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: Thank you, Chairman.
14 Good morning, Secretary.
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good morning.
16 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: Good to see you again.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
18 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: I want to follow up on
19 Representative Greiner's line of questioning and the number
20 of backlog permits that we have. I think you said a little
21 over 500. But in the Budget Book it says there's still 604
22 that are out there. I guess my concern is that discrepancy
23 and how many permits are out there and what you're doing for
24 that. But are they -- are some regions better than others?
25 If there's a backlog, say, in the northeast, are you sending
16 1 any of those permits somewhere else to get done? Like, how
2 are you working with that?
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly. Thank
4 you for the question.
5 One, I'll certainly make sure we get the
6 clarification on the number. I think the 545 that was
7 referenced earlier is probably closer to what the right
8 number is sitting here today. In terms of workload
9 management, we have a few things that we're doing across the
10 six regions. One is, you know, frankly authorization of
11 overtime within a region. You know, we've worked through
12 the Union to establish a process that allows us to move work
13 across regions where we have some capacity in some other
14 places and then the other which can be time-consuming on
15 larger projects. We've started up a Regional Permit
16 Coordination Office centrally where we have permits that
17 cross multiple counties, multiple regions. Rather than have
18 that coordinated within those regions, we're coordinating
19 that directly out of Central Office to move some of that
20 workload as well.
21 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: But is that the number of
22 permits that were submitted prior to June 30th of 2017? I
23 mean, we're in 2020. Is that how long these permits have
24 been there?
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: In some cases, yes,
17 1 again because of litigation and other things. In some cases
2 we're waiting on Federal determinations. Again, we can do a
3 fuller explanation of what that number entails.
4 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: I think one of the things
5 we hear in the district offices, you know, that the permits
6 go in and then there's something wrong with it and then it
7 goes back. Do you go through those permit applications and
8 like look through the whole permit before it's rejected back
9 to the applicant or is there a lot of back-and-forth time
10 with that?
11 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I'd say typically
12 it's the former. It can vary. In some cases there's
13 particular issues that get resolved through a phone call
14 where, you know, someone messed up a calculation or
15 something like that where it doesn't require a full
16 deficiency.
17 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: Does it go back to the
18 submission data? What's the time frame? Does it have to go
19 back and start over with, you know, if you have 60 days to
20 review it and then they find one "i" is not dotted, does it
21 go back and then have to start over 60 days again?
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: If it goes back
23 under the permit decision guarantee, the requirement is, you
24 know, once you have the deficiencies, you are no longer
25 covered under permit decision guarantee.
18 1 Now, that said, one of the data points that we're
2 starting to track and drive toward is that total time in to
3 drive that down. So when we have a permit that has a couple
4 deficiencies it doesn't just go into a bottom of a pile and
5 stay there. We are continuing to manage the entirety of
6 that work.
7 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: And I guess when you're
8 talking about the permit decision guarantee, you know, that
9 guarantee is in the eyes of the beholder. I don't think
10 some of the applicants think that it's being done in a
11 timely manner. You know, that's the thing that we hear all
12 the time.
13 The number of employees that you've hired by the
14 Bureau, you know, you were talking about, well, you'll do it
15 with overtime, right. So we've already talked about other
16 areas DEP might handle it, other regions might handle it, so
17 you wouldn't need the overtime. You know, is your staff
18 adequate to handle these? Apparently not because we have
19 such a backlog. So what are you doing to correct that?
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So one of the
21 things that we're looking at is some additional funding. So
22 we have a fee package in Chapter 91 and Chapter 92(a). 91
23 is Water Quality Management Permits. Those are State only
24 permits. 92(a) is our Federal permit requirements. That's
25 about $8 million that, you know, frankly keeps us relatively
19 1 level in terms of that funding but important to make sure
2 we're keeping capability.
3 In addition to that, we've been moving very
4 aggressively -- and we talked about this in prior years --
5 into electronic permitting. So our 105s, our wetlands,
6 stream crossings, encroachments permits we moved into an
7 electronic permitting format. We're currently working with
8 the conservation districts on moving 102, the Erosion
9 Sediment Permits that basically anytime you're disturbing
10 more than an acre of ground in the state, you have that as a
11 requirement.
12 And then in addition to that, we're looking at
13 general permits to simplify processes. We recently released
14 a PA GO2 that covers a lot of your traditional Economic
15 Development Permits. And then PA GO1 is one we're working
16 to get out now and that is for smaller sites to really,
17 really simplify those kinds of processes.
18 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: Thank you.
19 I see my time is up. But I really, you know,
20 would appreciate it if you'd look at the internal management
21 and try to get those permits processed as quickly as
22 possible.
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
24 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: Accurately but quickly.
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
20 1 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: Thank you.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
3 REPRESENTATIVE HAHN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
4 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Thank you, Mr.
5 Secretary.
6 Next is Representative Sanchez.
7 REPRESENTATIVE SANCHEZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
8 Mr. Secretary, how are you?
9 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good.
10 REPRESENTATIVE SANCHEZ: Thank you for coming
11 today.
12 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
13 REPRESENTATIVE SANCHEZ: In the Governor's
14 Budget, protecting Pennsylvanians and supporting working
15 families is a big theme. In that regard, protection from
16 harmful PFAS substances -- and I'm sure you're very familiar
17 with that. The Governor's PFAS Action Team recommended the
18 need to establish a maximum contaminant level or MCL for
19 these compounds, the so-called forever chemicals.
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
21 REPRESENTATIVE SANCHEZ: Last week the Federal
22 Environmental Protection Agency announced they now intend to
23 regulate the PFAS and PFOA forever chemicals in the drinking
24 water that have caused these problems, particularly in my
25 area of southeastern Montgomery County, southeastern
21 1 Pennsylvania, but all around the State.
2 Can you comment on where we now stand with
3 setting the MCL, when we might have it in place, the EPA's
4 plan to delay those actions?
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
6 So, one, I always say that this is -- you know,
7 for regulators, for legislators, this is one of the toughest
8 kinds of issues to deal with, which is something where we're
9 still learning, right? We're still learning both the extent
10 of the issue across the Commonwealth, across the nation, as
11 well as impacts of the data that we have in terms of a list
12 of chemicals that, depending on which source you use, is
13 over 3,000 chemicals, over 4,000 chemicals, and we're able
14 to test for two dozen of them or so. It's something where
15 every day we collectively are learning more and more.
16 The things we've done to support -- and, one,
17 we're still proceeding with the MCL and some of that same
18 press that came out about the EPAs announcement last week.
19 There were comments in there where they are still at least
20 four years away from having an MCL. So on our end we're
21 continuing to work.
22 A couple specific things we've had going on. One
23 is a sampling plan to go out to drinking water suppliers and
24 actually look for it. So 90 percent of the samples that
25 we're taking are places where we would reasonably expect to
22 1 find the chemicals. The first-quarter results of that had
2 only one of 96 samples that were above the health advisory
3 limit set by EPA, the 70 parts per trillion. A third had
4 some detection below that. And then the other two-thirds
5 were non-detected.
6 But getting our hands around how prevalent it is
7 in the environment is an important first step. In addition
8 to that, we have a contract with Drexel University to help
9 us through the toxicology discussion as to what is the right
10 limit to set for PFAS and PFOA as well as other chemicals,
11 but PFAS and PFOA being the issues of most concern both in
12 the southeast as we've been looking across the state.
13 REPRESENTATIVE SANCHEZ: When might we expect
14 results from that contract you just referenced, the Drexel?
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: The contract is for
16 a year. So we would expect around the end of this year to
17 start seeing kind of the initial take from Drexel. And in
18 addition to that, we're doing a year of sampling of those
19 water systems.
20 I'll also point out though, in addition to that,
21 I mean, we have work going on in our clean-up program
22 related to clean-up standards of that. We have a draft
23 regulation that went through the Environmental Quality Board
24 on that. We have a sampling that we're doing at surface
25 water so we're using our service water monitoring to have
23 1 some understanding of just what's in our streams and rivers
2 across the state.
3 It's not an issue that respects one vector in
4 terms of water or any media frankly. It's a waste issue, a
5 water issue, a clean-up issue, an air issue, etc.
6 REPRESENTATIVE SANCHEZ: Okay. Would the
7 Department consider taking a position in the EPA's comment
8 period? Would that be appropriate with some of your early
9 results of sharing that information?
10 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I'm sure we'll be
11 commenting on any of the work EPA is doing. We have in the
12 past and I suspect we would continue to do so.
13 REPRESENTATIVE SANCHEZ: I see my time is
14 expiring.
15 Thank you, Secretary.
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you so much.
17 REPRESENTATIVE SANCHEZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
18 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Again, I wanted to
19 kind of add on to that. We were excited last year when we
20 were able to get Representative Todd Stephens's bill passed
21 by the General Assembly dealing with this issue.
22 Mr. Secretary, I hope you will keep us informed,
23 the entire General Assembly, as to how those things are
24 going.
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
24 1 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: It's always nice to
2 follow up with the success of legislation.
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
4 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: And what it means to
5 drinking water and the safety of people in parts of our
6 State.
7 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: One piece, too, and
8 I'm sure we'll probably get into it a little bit more later
9 but the Hazardous Site Clean-Up Fund is an important
10 component within this, too, in terms of actually being able
11 to clean up these sites and having the resources to do that.
12 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Since the time of that
13 passing, has the Federal Government stepped up any more than
14 they had previously not done?
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So the rough
16 timeline, you know, it was the beginning of -- they went
17 through 2019 saying they were going to kind of release their
18 plan and at the end of last year released a -- sent a
19 regulatory determination to the Office of Management Budget.
20 What got released last week was that determination. The
21 determination was essentially to establish MCLs for PFAS and
22 PFOA. As I said, that kicks off a process where they're at
23 least four years away from actually being able to follow
24 through on that.
25 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Thank you.
25 1 Next questioner is Representative Fritz.
2 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
3 And, Mr. Secretary, good to see you.
4 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good to see you.
5 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: Mr. Secretary, can you
6 kindly explain the roles of our River Commission such as the
7 DRBC and the SRBC?
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
9 So they are important partners for us in a
10 variety of work. There are slight differences between them,
11 but I think generally they have a focus on water quantity
12 and water quality. We rely on them a lot in terms of
13 operation of gauges.
14 In addition to that, DRBC has done some work for
15 us in terms of ground water monitoring in the southeastern
16 portion of the state. DRBC is also an important partner for
17 us as we look at, for example, something that's of concern
18 to some members. The Federal Government looks at the F. E.
19 Walter Dam in providing us some of that core expertise that
20 the Commission has to support the impact changes to that dam
21 would have on the salt line in Philly and other issues like
22 that.
23 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: I would note other members
24 I believe are going to speak to the dam, but I wanted focus
25 a little bit, if we may, you mentioned water quality. Do
26 1 you assert that their responsibility and role is to note
2 water quality and record water quality or is it to regulate
3 water quality?
4 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So they have a
5 special protections program under -- special protection
6 water program under DRBC where they do have a regulatory
7 responsibility for water quality.
8 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: Mr. Secretary, are there
9 River Commission functions that are not duplicate with DEP
10 functions?
11 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
12 As I said, they operate the gauges and in general
13 they are representative of -- they provide a different
14 perspective, which is managing the entirety of the Delaware
15 River Watershed, the Ohio River Watershed, the Susquehanna
16 River Watershed, so decisions that might be made from a
17 quantity or quality perspective within the State. And
18 frankly, a lot of our quantity requirements are relatively
19 limited as a state. A lot of that falls within the
20 Commissions.
21 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: So mainly the quantity
22 function differs from the purview of the DEP?
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Correct.
24 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: Okay.
25 So, Mr. Secretary, aside from their
27 1 appropriation, where else do these agencies receive funding
2 from?
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So they receive, as
4 you say, from our appropriation. In addition, we are
5 funding through the Clean Water Fund, as I said, that
6 groundwater study that the DRBC is engaged in. And then
7 they receive other -- I'm not sure what the totality of
8 their funding is in terms of what other jurisdictions are
9 providing or other grants that they're provided. But I'm
10 sure that's --
11 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: I've got a little bit more
12 ground to cover so I'll just plow right into it if you'll
13 allow me.
14 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
15 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: So do you acknowledge, Mr.
16 Secretary, that the Commissions, and particularly DRBC,
17 receives substantial dollars in the form of grants from
18 outside agencies?
19 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I'm not sure of the
20 amount of grant dollars. I wouldn't want to speculate.
21 That would be something that I'm sure we could find out from
22 the Commissions.
23 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: Okay.
24 And if you would look into that, I would
25 appreciate it as well.
28 1 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
2 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: I can help you to
3 substantiate that. And along that same theme, I want to
4 assert that if an outside agency is controlling the funding
5 at one of our agencies that perhaps that special interest or
6 that agenda manifests our State agency. Would you consider
7 that to be a reality?
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I don't think I
9 understand the question. If you could repeat that or
10 restate it.
11 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: That if outside interests
12 influence through funding our agency such as the DRBC, do
13 you think that that would impact their agenda?
14 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I have no idea
15 honestly. I don't know what the specifics of that question
16 are.
17 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: Well, I'll speak to it a
18 little bit if you'll allow me to because we have a
19 particular circumstance where the Delaware River Basin is
20 lobbying against a particular piece of legislation, namely,
21 House Bill 827. Do you feel as though that is proper and
22 permissible, Mr. Secretary?
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I honestly don't
24 know the detail of it so I wouldn't want to speak to it
25 without knowing a little bit more, frankly.
29 1 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: If you would kindly look
2 into that, that would be great.
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
4 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: I appreciate that.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
6 REPRESENTATIVE FRITZ: And I'm going to end with
7 this claim, Mr. Secretary, that when we allow activist
8 interests to assert their will in Pennsylvania that it makes
9 Pennsylvania less competitive. And we are doing our
10 residents an injustice by preventing them the economic
11 opportunity and by preventing them access to their own
12 property. I'll end with that.
13 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
14 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Next questioner is
15 Representative McCarter.
16 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: Thank you very much,
17 Mr. Chairman.
18 Good morning, Secretary McDonnell. How are you?
19 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good morning.
20 Good.
21 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: I want to start out by
22 first of all thanking you and your Department for
23 highlighting and leading the charge in terms of trying to
24 combat climate change along with the Governor's actions on
25 obviously what is one of the most serious problems facing
30 1 mankind and surely here in Pennsylvania, the country, and
2 the world.
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
4 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: One element of the
5 Governor's actions has been to join the climate alliance
6 along with Governors across the country to commit ourselves
7 to the goals of eventually getting to a significant
8 reduction in greenhouse gas by 2050. And as part of that, I
9 think Pennsylvania has set its goal at 80 percent reduction
10 by 2050.
11 Could you highlight for us very specifically,
12 though, what is contained within the budget request this
13 year for DEP aside from the commitment to go with RGGI that
14 moves us in that direction?
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
16 And I'd say a few things. One is we have had
17 ongoing -- and some of this, it doesn't get line itemed
18 outright. We have ongoing dollar commitments for the
19 Driving Pennsylvania Forward Initiative and Alternative Fuel
20 Incentive Grant Program on the vehicle side of things. Our
21 air quality and energy staff have been working through the
22 RGGI process.
23 Again, that doesn't even appear in the budget
24 but, you know, in terms of staff and legal and energy
25 working through those issues, we've taken some of those
31 1 Federal dollars that we get through the State Energy Program
2 and committed that toward further evaluation of and study of
3 climate impacts. And, of course, we have the requirements
4 under the Climate Act to produce a climate action plan on an
5 every-three-year time commitment. And we have dollars going
6 into the modeling and other things related to that.
7 So it won't show up as specific line items but
8 there's a lot of work going on within the Agency focused on
9 this. And that's to say nothing frankly of we're engaged
10 with not just within our Agency but other agencies around
11 climate adaptation, climate mitigation pieces.
12 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: And I appreciate all of
13 those particular actions that are taking place. But would
14 you hazard to guess as to what percentage of the dollar
15 amount then within the DEP budget is actually going
16 specifically to deal with climate change?
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I wouldn't want to
18 hazard a guess. We can get you some information about the
19 budget amounts though.
20 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: 20 percent? 10
21 percent?
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Again, I wouldn't
23 want to hazard a guess as to what that actual dollar figure
24 looks like. I mean, I'll point out again that it frankly
25 becomes an issue that is hard to disaggregate from other
32 1 issues.
2 So, for example, in our air quality area, we
3 spent a lot of time working through a regulatory package
4 related to control technique guidelines from oil and gas.
5 That is specifically focused on DOC reduction. But as a
6 side benefit of that, we're getting 75,000 tons of methane
7 reduction as part of that regulation. So a lot of this
8 doesn't lend itself to a -- it's a component of a lot of
9 what we do now. So it doesn't lend itself to that kind of
10 disaggregation in every case.
11 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: I guess what I'm
12 suggesting also though is that, you know, the specific line
13 items could be improved or be established to deal with, you
14 know, alternative energy, to deal with -- such as going back
15 to the first question I think you had from Representative
16 Kim dealing with electrical charging stations.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
18 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: Those things could
19 surely be in there and I think would reflect better on
20 Pennsylvania in tackling this problem.
21 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
22 And again, I'd point out, you know -- and my
23 guess is, it doesn't get broken out like the DGS budget,
24 right? I mentioned the Volt being in the basement. In
25 addition to the lease cost for that Volt, DGS is installing
33 1 a Level 2 charger in the basement of our building for that.
2 It's not going to be -- there won't be a line item
3 specifically for that kind of charging infrastructure within
4 DGS. It's something that is certainly worth discussion,
5 though, whether or not we want to break out those things
6 that are specifically focused on how we support our climate
7 initiatives.
8 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: Thank you very much.
9 I see my time is up. Thank you.
10 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
11 REPRESENTATIVE McCARTER: Thank you, Mr.
12 Chairman.
13 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative
14 Heffley.
15 REPRESENTATIVE HEFFLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
16 And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here
17 today.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
19 REPRESENTATIVE HEFFLEY: Just to follow up on a
20 letter that we had sent to your office regarding something
21 you commented on earlier, the Francis E. Walter Dam. My
22 question is more or less in regards to the role DEP will
23 play in that 50 percent of the land mass in the Delaware
24 River Basin is in Pennsylvania, yet we have 25 percent of
25 the vote. The other votes are held by Delaware and New
34 1 Jersey and New York and the Federal Government.
2 I think it was in 2015 there was an insert in the
3 Federal Budget or Appropriation to allow the Army Corps of
4 Engineers to initiate a study as to the other uses possibly
5 for the water that's in the Francis E. Walter Dam. There's
6 two uses for that right now. One of them is primarily a
7 flood control and also recreation.
8 The New York City Water Authority has put a lot
9 of money forward to pay for this scoping study which is very
10 concerning. It should be to all the residents of
11 Pennsylvania that they would assert this. New York City
12 Water Authority has very aggressively been going about
13 securing water rights.
14 They also don't just provide water for New York
15 City. They also sell that water in different boroughs and
16 municipalities in northern New Jersey. Philadelphia gets
17 their drinking water from the Delaware River, as is a large
18 portion of New Jersey. Hazleton pulled some of their
19 drinking water out of the Lehigh River as well.
20 Would this study and the possible impact that it
21 could have on the tourism and recreational industry and also
22 the fishing quality in the Lehigh River and the Upper
23 Delaware, what assurances do we have that our
24 representatives to the DRBC -- as stated earlier, the DRBC
25 is blocking economic development in the northern tier,
35 1 Northeastern Pennsylvania. Also New York and New Jersey
2 have not been friendly at all to Pennsylvania Energy. While
3 they seem willing to put forward money to study to get our
4 water rights, they also are blocking the production of
5 pipelines that could deliver much cheaper and affordable
6 natural gas that we could possibly, you know, bring in some
7 tax revenue on if we could get it to market.
8 What is the DEP doing currently right now along
9 with their partners in the Fish and Boat Commission to
10 ensure that we're not going to sacrifice or lose any of our
11 rights and that we're not going to have any net loss to this
12 study or what could come out of this study?
13 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you for that.
14 And I'll say at the outset, you're asking, 1,
15 exactly the right questions and, 2, thank you and the other
16 members for the advocacy around these issues.
17 As you said, the Army Corps had that budget line
18 item. It hadn't moved forward primarily because there was
19 no non-Federal sponsor and to be blunt, it wasn't something
20 that we saw a lot of need for that particular study.
21 New York City stepped up to be a non-Federal
22 sponsor and that did create a concern rightfully which is
23 why we worked to get the Basin Commission into the middle of
24 that as well. I would say the Basin Commission has exactly
25 the kind of data expertise experience with these kinds of
36 1 water quality issues that they would be the ones we want to
2 work on. It's not something we have nearly as much
3 information or modeling on.
4 I will point out this is part of a much larger
5 discussion as well related to the Flexible Flow Management
6 Plan where we have very good partnership not just with the
7 DRBC but also the City of Philadelphia, New Jersey,
8 Delaware, other partners, who all have an interest in making
9 sure that we're not impacting the salt line, that our
10 recreation interests are pretty --
11 REPRESENTATIVE HEFFLEY: I'm limited for time.
12 But it's my understanding that the salt line has
13 not changed in quite some time on the Delaware River. And
14 just as you said, it's very concerning that New York City --
15 they're not putting that money out there for nothing. I
16 mean, they --
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: They want to keep
18 their water.
19 REPRESENTATIVE HEFFLEY: Yeah. So with any votes
20 that would be taken to alter the effect or to alter what
21 water in that dam could be used for -- because flood control
22 is a huge issue, right? Anything they can do to impact that
23 could have downstream effects throughout the Lehigh Valley,
24 Easton, all throughout Carbon County. It was put in there
25 for a reason. And also the recreational aspect of it.
37 1 But what -- would any decision have to be
2 unanimous to change the use of the Francis E. Walter Dam?
3 Would that have to be unanimous among all the Board members
4 on the DRBC or could the other members overrule Pennsylvania
5 on that?
6 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I guess to be
7 clear, the Army Corps is engaged in the study and it's their
8 study. So DRBC is a non-Federal partner within that. So
9 it's not a decision of the DRBC what happens with the F. E.
10 Walter Dam. And the same way it's not a decision of New
11 York City what happens. It's ultimately a study of what can
12 be done with that dam and what would the cost of that be.
13 That said, we are very, very much engaged in
14 making sure that the flood protection and recreation aspects
15 of the dam are not impacted as well as making sure -- and I
16 think this came up in some of the comments, that we're not
17 seeing impacts on, for example, taking a federally
18 endangered species through any actions that might occur with
19 the dam.
20 So I think we share exactly all of the concerns
21 and are working toward hopefully through a good process to
22 address them.
23 REPRESENTATIVE HEFFLEY: Thank you so much.
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
25 REPRESENTATIVE HEFFLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
38 1 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Next is Representative
2 Davis.
3 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
4 Mr. Secretary, welcome.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
6 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: You know, last year my
7 district is home to the Clairton cohorts, U.S. Steel
8 Clairton Coke Works Facility. And last year my region in
9 Allegheny County had significant issues with air quality due
10 to the fire at the plant and then just the subsequent
11 pollution that occurs there.
12 Can you talk about the State DEP's role in air
13 quality monitoring, specifically in Allegheny but also in
14 other parts of the Commonwealth?
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: This is different
16 than water where we will delegate certain responsibilities
17 to counties through the conservation districts.
18 In the case of air quality, both Philadelphia and
19 Allegheny County are directly delegated air quality
20 authority by the Federal Government. So we don't have much
21 role in the direct oversight permitting, etc. We do offer
22 support for them on modeling submission of State
23 implementation plans for both Allegheny County and
24 Philadelphia County. But the air quality permitting and
25 inspection responsibilities reside within the county.
39 1 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: So just for a point of
2 clarification, the fines -- the Allegheny County Health
3 Department levied a number of fines against U.S. Steel.
4 Those fines are set here at the State level, correct?
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
6 It falls under the regs, under the State in terms
7 of that.
8 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Okay. In my research, we
9 realized those fines haven't been raised in decades. And we
10 -- I've authored House Bill 1752 legislation to increase
11 those fines to bring them in line with the EPA. They are
12 not even in line with what the EPA fines for air pollution
13 violation episodes. Would you or your Department or the
14 Administration be willing to support an increase to air
15 pollution fines in this Commonwealth?
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: What I would want
17 to do is have our staff take a look. We can certainly get
18 back with our position on that.
19 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you.
20 And then just another component to this -- and it
21 was highlighted by the Clairton Coke Works incident but also
22 the incident that happened at the Philadelphia Refinery --
23 we've noticed when these major air pollution episodes
24 happen, one of the things that often gets overlooked is the
25 communication to the community surrounding those areas. In
40 1 my legislation it would require that those facilities
2 implement a municipal notification warning system so when an
3 episode like that does happen, the community is informed.
4 Does the DEP have any thoughts on a system like
5 that, whether it would be valuable or whether you could
6 support something like that?
7 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Again, I think
8 we're going to look at the detail. But, I mean, certainly
9 we would be generally supportive of making sure communities
10 are informed.
11 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
12 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
13 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: I just would like to
14 include I think this is a major issue in the Commonwealth.
15 We in Allegheny County have done better over the years in
16 our trending better in terms of air quality. We still have
17 work and a ways to go. I believe we need to give the
18 counties more resources to be more aggressive on air
19 polluters and ensuring that major companies don't just see
20 fines as a cost of doing business.
21 I hope that you will seriously look at House Bill
22 1752 and advocate and support that legislation.
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you so much.
24 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
41 1 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
2 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative Topper.
3 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: Good morning, Mr.
4 Secretary.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good morning.
6 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: Good to see you again.
7 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
8 Good to see you.
9 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: I noticed in this budget
10 the Environmental Protection Operation increases a little
11 over 20 percent. And that includes an initiative for 15 new
12 Bureau of Air Quality staff. What's the purpose of this
13 initiative, the additional resources for this particular
14 fund? Is that to address new issues or current issues or
15 what? Could you give me a little -- it seems like a pretty
16 hefty increase.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
18 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: And I understand, you
19 know, that some of that little over a million is for new
20 staff and maybe why those 15 positions are needed.
21 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure. No. Thank
22 you.
23 Just for clarification, you'll see some increases
24 in some of those budget line items in the General Fund,
25 which is essentially an undoing of the Special Fund transfer
42 1 piece that was included in last year's budget.
2 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: A little over 11 million
3 that comes back over I think from the Stewardship Fund and
4 Recycling Fund; is that correct?
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Correct. Yes.
6 Again, I don't have those numbers directly in
7 front of me, but it's something on the order of that.
8 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: Okay.
9 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Within air quality,
10 it's really to address some current issues. One, just at
11 the broadest possible level, we've had a 25 percent decrease
12 in the amount of staff within the Clean Air Program. In
13 addition to the 15 positions, we're also moving -- we also
14 have a fee package that's been through the Environmental
15 Quality Board to again keep us level funded and deal with
16 some deficiencies that have been identified by EPA, Federal
17 EPA.
18 The specific things that we run into, one, is on
19 the permitting side, just the ability to get through air
20 quality permits, which, as you can imagine, particularly for
21 Title 5 and some of the larger permits, can be very
22 challenging. And then, two, to support that we end up in
23 this program probably more than any other doing a lot of
24 modeling and monitoring which takes some intensive work.
25 And there's frankly been more demand for both
43 1 additional monitoring and additional constituents to be
2 modeled -- monitored rather. It entails all of that.
3 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: And I'd like to go down
4 that path of more demand a little bit so you can help me
5 understand the EPA.
6 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
7 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: The EPA has said that CO2
8 emissions from electric power generation have decreased
9 about 27 percent nationwide since 2005, which is really the
10 beginning of when we started the transition more towards
11 natural gas. But in Pennsylvania it's decreased in that
12 same time almost 40 percent. So obviously we're making
13 positive strides in Pennsylvania in our air quality
14 direction, would you agree?
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly. Yes.
16 And I've said this in some of the other hearings,
17 we've seen improvement in air quality and that's not just in
18 the context of CO2 but in our criteria of pollutants. For
19 climate in particular, it's a matter of pace as well. You
20 know, we're looking to be more aggressive on that.
21 The other thing I'd point out in that reduction
22 is it isn't all control. It's also this plant shutdown has
23 been supplanted by this plan. So less emissions coming out
24 of that plant but we still have permitting oversight, all of
25 the other responsibilities that come with that that aren't
44 1 dependent on the amount of emissions.
2 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: Because we're seeing
3 improvement there, also improvement in the methane level
4 which has decreased 12 percent since 2005, the EPA credits
5 this achievement -- and I'm quoting the EPA here -- as
6 largely due to decreases in emissions from distribution,
7 transmission, and storage of natural gas. So I guess my
8 overall question is, according to the EPA, it seems as
9 though our production of natural gas and more transitioning
10 to natural gas has certainly been a benefit, not only to our
11 economy but also to our environment.
12 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
13 And as I said, a lot of that has been at the
14 expense of, for example, our older coal plants. We saw our
15 first zero CO2 source with Three Mile Island recently
16 supplanted by those natural gas plants.
17 I'll also point out, you know, one of the
18 interesting things in terms of our total CO2 numbers is
19 traditionally power sector has been at the top of that list.
20 It's not second. Industrial, which includes natural gas
21 production amongst other things, is now the No. 1 source of
22 CO2 under our emissions inventory.
23 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: I'm glad we're seeing air
24 quality improve. And again, I'm looking at that budget
25 number and the new staff as being maybe slightly higher than
45 1 what we need.
2 But my time has expired and I'll turn it back to
3 the Chairman.
4 Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
6 And I think the one thing I would say -- and we
7 see this in a number of areas where we still have -- even as
8 the emissions come down, we still have the permit
9 responsibility. We still have the inspection
10 responsibility, the reports that come in, the maintenance
11 and monitoring and review of continuous emission monitoring
12 from the site.
13 So the fact that emissions come down, it's not --
14 there's not some linear correlation to the amount of staff
15 or the amount of work that it takes to achieve those
16 benefits.
17 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: Thank you.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
19 REPRESENTATIVE TOPPER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
20 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Thank you.
21 Representative Bullock.
22 REPRESENTATIVE BULLOCK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
23 Good morning, Mr. Secretary. How are you doing
24 today?
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good. How are you?
46 1 REPRESENTATIVE BULLOCK: Great.
2 I'm not going to quote the Lorax to you today but
3 I will start with my usual line of questioning. And I have
4 about three questions that I'd like to ask you.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
6 REPRESENTATIVE BULLOCK: The first is, the
7 Department has never quite done that well when it came to
8 hiring diverse candidates. You do have a significant
9 portion of females that work with you but not as many in
10 regards to minority. I would like to discuss any
11 improvements in that area and, if not, where have you
12 addressed any promotions or executive or supervisor
13 opportunities for woman and minority candidates within your
14 office.
15 And my second question is whether or not your
16 Department is doing anything or has any involvement in
17 regards to lead and asbestos and toxins, particularly in
18 schools. But as we've learned, in many of our housing and
19 infrastructure throughout the Commonwealth, we are dealing
20 with sort of an epidemic in regards to the toxic materials
21 that are in our beautiful architecture and history across
22 the Commonwealth that are making families sick.
23 And lastly, last year you conducted our first
24 litter survey in the last ten years. I read some articles
25 that we are -- that the litter in this Commonwealth is
47 1 costing us upwards of $14 million annually to manage on our
2 roadways. What are your -- after conducting that survey,
3 what are your responses and how is that being addressed in
4 this budget?
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Not a lot there,
6 right?
7 So first, on the minority hiring, the statewide
8 average is about 15 percent. We are up slightly to 7.7
9 percent, still not where we want to be. That's something
10 that we're actually -- and I'll give my colleague Secretary
11 Dunn, who I know you will be talking to later, credit. They
12 started up a Diversity Committee just in the last few months
13 here. That's going to be looking at a variety of issues,
14 this one included.
15 And, you know, we have initiatives in recruitment
16 to minority areas, historically black colleges, those kinds
17 of initiatives. But we really do want to see some movement
18 in those numbers to the extent we can.
19 Lead and asbestos, there's a variety of places
20 that we will intersect with that. The biggie that I think
21 is out there is the indoor air quality ramifications of this
22 where our oversight is somewhat limited. We do on the air
23 quality side have certification for the asbestos program.
24 So we both certified the remediators and then they have to
25 let us know when they're going into a site that they have
48 1 cleared it, you know, the construction crew has cleared it
2 of either having asbestos or taking the appropriate actions.
3 On the water side, obviously, we have interaction
4 with lead and copper rules for drinking water that we're
5 involved with. One of the things that we are actively
6 engaged in internally is looking at, assuming there's
7 additional funding available and more of this material, what
8 does that mean for the waste management end of it in terms
9 of support that might be needed there. So that's definitely
10 something of concern and something that we're assessing and
11 monitoring.
12 And the last thing I'll say on the asbestos piece
13 in particular is, as we see an uptick in that, we'll need to
14 make sure we're on top of who is doing that work where
15 there's going to be a demand and an increase in demand. And
16 I'm not sure what the capacity is out there so there will be
17 some management of that.
18 On litter survey, the estimate is 502 million
19 pieces of litter on our roadways across the state. On our
20 local roads there's over 1,000 items per mile. And the
21 number is much higher on our interstates. The nine cities
22 they surveyed, in terms of cost, it was actually $68 million
23 that they were spending to address litter issues. So the
24 survey is really, really good information. Keep
25 Pennsylvania Beautiful, PennDOT, and us have been working on
49 1 a variety of fronts. We did a litter survey toward the end
2 of last year. We're now working on an action plan for how
3 we address this.
4 We're engaged in a process of looking at Act 101
5 right now to see how that can be further supportive of this.
6 But the survey of the actual litter and the survey of
7 Pennsylvanians in terms of their attitudes toward litter
8 show that this remains a significant issue.
9 REPRESENTATIVE BULLOCK: Just a point of
10 clarification. So the 14 million I saw, was that possibly
11 just Philadelphia's piece?
12 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: That may have just
13 been the Philadelphia number, yes. But across the nine
14 major metropolitan areas that were surveyed, the number was
15 68 million.
16 REPRESENTATIVE BULLOCK: Thank you very much, Mr.
17 Secretary.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: You're welcome.
19 REPRESENTATIVE BULLOCK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
20 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Next questioner is
21 Representative Gabler.
22 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
23 Good morning, Mr. Secretary. How are you today?
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good. How are you?
25 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Good.
50 1 So I wanted to talk a little bit about the
2 Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative proposal that the
3 Administration is looking at. Is the implementation and
4 execution of the Administration's plans to join RGGI
5 accounted for in your Department's budget request?
6 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: We have staff
7 working on it right now. There's air quality and energy
8 money going into modeling. That's actually to support both
9 the RGGI modeling as well as we have a petition for an
10 economywide greenhouse gas approach that was accepted by the
11 Environmental Quality Board. So it's supporting all of
12 that.
13 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Is that driving the need
14 for the 15 new air quality staff that Representative Topper
15 was asking about?
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: No.
17 The environmental protection operations line item
18 is our field staff. The way I always break it down for
19 folks is general government operations for us is
20 administrative and overhead for the most part.
21 Environmental program management is central office staff.
22 And then the environmental protection operations is that
23 field staff that's doing again modeling, monitoring, and
24 permit and inspection work.
25 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: So the 15 new positions
51 1 would be field staff that would not be impacted one way or
2 the other by RGGI?
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Correct.
4 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Okay. Thank you.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
6 Well, the one slight clarification I would say is
7 ultimately the RGGI numbers would be included within Title 5
8 permits and things like that. So there's some interaction
9 but it's not development of the reg itself.
10 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Okay.
11 So then the other thing that came up in the
12 previous line of questioning, there's two funding sources I
13 see that the Department is asking. There's the one and a
14 half million dollar increase from the General Fund as well
15 as you mentioned a fee that is being proposed via rule
16 making through the EQB.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Correct.
18 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Why two separate revenue
19 sources? Isn't this kind of a double-dip?
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I think, frankly,
21 it varies program by program, fund by fund. And I think
22 there's been policy conversations about what is the right
23 mix of General Fund versus special funds program by program.
24 In this particular case, one, for EPA, we have to
25 demonstrate that we have fees sufficient within our Title 5
52 1 Program to support the Title 5 Program. So that was a
2 deficiency that was identified by U.S. EPA and something
3 that the fee package in part helps to rectify.
4 The 1.5 million is for additional staff so that
5 we can bring on more people. The air quality fees is
6 keeping us level funded essentially.
7 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Okay.
8 I would express a concern that there is very
9 large growth that we're seeing between the line items and
10 then we're also seeing fees. It just seems that there's
11 growth on both sides of this and that certainly would be a
12 concern for me from a taxpayer perspective, from an economic
13 competitive perspective. So I think that's something that
14 we need to be very careful with.
15 I want to keep moving since we are short on time.
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
17 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Looking at the Regional
18 Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a stated goal of that initiative
19 is the reduction of fossil fuel use in electric power
20 generation. As the Administration unilaterally pursues
21 entrance into this program which would take decisions about
22 our environment and our economy out of the hands of
23 Pennsylvanians and shifted to decision-makers in neighboring
24 states, my question for you is, are you concerned that this
25 policy that claims to focus on improving air quality in our
53 1 state would really just shift generation and market forces
2 to shift these production plants to other neighboring states
3 that are non-RGGI members, such as Ohio, which is actually
4 upwind of us, which really would not yield any kind of
5 environmental benefit?
6 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Two things I'd say
7 to that. One is it's very clearly -- and RGGI is structured
8 as a series of State programs that are linked. So we're not
9 giving up any authority, not giving up any, you know -- and
10 in fact, when we release the draft of the RGGI reg, there's
11 provisions in there that if we need to go it alone, that's
12 also an option within that.
13 It's not structured in a way where each state is
14 beholden to some central decision.
15 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: I'm a little confused how
16 that would work because if you have a regional initiative,
17 it seems that we're going into something that would have to
18 align with other states. But if we're doing that, then
19 we're essentially losing our ability to self-determine.
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: There's a cap. And
21 within that cap, each of the states would have a budget.
22 That's something that is subject to discussion and
23 negotiation. And then within our program, we can do other
24 things. For example, if you look at our reg, we have set
25 aside for waste coal plants, for example, because that is an
54 1 important driver for us. So I don't look at it as we're
2 giving up authority. In fact, I think it's an important
3 tool for us and an incremental tool. It's not something
4 where a switch gets thrown. It's a 3 percent reduction year
5 over year on a going forward basis in our greenhouse gas
6 emissions from the power sector.
7 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: The concern that I have
8 is as we go to that 80 percent goal that was mentioned
9 previously, how would we continue to be a net exporter of
10 electricity if we're going to a reduction of 80 percent and
11 how would we continue to have that economic activity in our
12 state?
13 And I'll just end with, has the Governor's Budget
14 request actually estimated what the decline in revenue would
15 be by losing that economic activity from the generation
16 within our state?
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I'll answer very
18 quickly. When we do the modeling, it's called IPM modeling
19 within this. It does track leakage within. It makes
20 economic decisions across the generation. So that's
21 something that you'll see in these numbers.
22 I'll say frankly one of the things that we've
23 seen in that modeling under business as usual is we start to
24 see our net export status erode because of decisions being
25 made in other states to bring on renewable generation, like
55 1 ULTRA wind that's within the PGM queue right now.
2 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Thank you.
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
4 REPRESENTATIVE GABLER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
5 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative
6 Fiedler.
7 REPRESENTATIVE FIEDLER: Thank you.
8 Good morning. Thank you for being here.
9 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
10 REPRESENTATIVE FIEDLER: So this budget I believe
11 moves us in the right direction in many regards, including
12 eventually hopefully fully funding the DEP. To be honest, I
13 would have liked to see additional DEP funding in this
14 budget, but I'm glad that we're moving in the right
15 direction.
16 And I think it's really important to lay out very
17 clearly in budget numbers the situation that we find
18 ourselves in, which is when it comes to DEP, historically
19 low staffing levels at the Agency and huge funding cuts when
20 compared to the 2002 budget. I have no doubt that that has
21 a huge impact on the health and the well-being of our
22 residents, our land, our water, and our air.
23 And I wondered if you could give us an idea of
24 what sort of impact the underfunding of DEP has on our
25 beautiful state of Pennsylvania?
56 1 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure. Thank you
2 for the question.
3 A couple things. The environment impacts of
4 these things is always first and foremost. I think we've
5 done a lot of work and recently had the performance-based
6 budget hearing to drive better efficiency in the work that
7 we do, some of that moving into electronic and all of that.
8 We've seen continued improvements in air quality and other
9 places, but there are areas where we have struggled but
10 taken efforts to address that.
11 So, for example, drinking water, the compliance
12 status there is below where we want it to be. And part of
13 that was related to underfunding within that. So we
14 recently raised the drinking water fees on drinking water
15 providers so we could bring on 33 new positions and satisfy
16 a deficiency that was identified by the Federal Government.
17 On oil and gas, we are getting to new permittees
18 a little over four times. There are supposed to be up to
19 six inspections that occur during permitting of a new well
20 and we're averaging around, I think, it's 4.2 times out
21 there.
22 But we're also not necessarily getting to those
23 older wells, conventional wells, which we try to get to once
24 every ten years; existing unconventional wells, which we try
25 to get to once every, I think, it's four years; and out to
57 1 the storage fields twice a year. We're just not
2 accomplishing that right now and that's something that we're
3 looking at how technology can help but we also know it
4 doesn't get us the entirety of the way there.
5 And then when you look at something like the
6 Chesapeake Bay and the efforts around that, we've identified
7 a total of all-in, all parties in, funding gap of 324
8 million. There's some money to support staffing within the
9 Agency to support the locals and we're doing some things
10 with other partners. But there's a big gap there in terms
11 of water quality improvement.
12 REPRESENTATIVE FIEDLER: Thank you for that.
13 As a member of the Appropriations Committee, as a
14 resident, as a mother, as a person who cares about our
15 state, I would love to see a way in which we can get to full
16 funding but also a three- or a five-year plan so we can know
17 what to expect. Do you have thoughts on that, on what you
18 would like to see so that we can get to that point in the
19 coming years?
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I was talking with
21 Representative Dunbar before. I'm a big believer in
22 management planning. And I think as we're moving forward on
23 identifying some of these big problems and what the deltas
24 are that are creating the problems, I think, you know,
25 that's precisely some of the conversation to have is, what
58 1 is the longer-term plan? And we started putting together a
2 little bit of that in the context of climate, electric
3 vehicle, solar, the watershed implementation plan for the
4 Bay, etc., but I think it's an interesting conversation to
5 have to figure out how we marry those up with the
6 appropriations process.
7 REPRESENTATIVE FIEDLER: Thank you for your time.
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
9 REPRESENTATIVE FIEDLER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative
11 Struzzi.
12 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
13 Welcome back.
14 Good morning, Mr. Secretary McDonnell.
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good morning.
16 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: I have to continue on
17 the theme of the original greenhouse gas initiative, as you,
18 I'm sure, expected. You know that I represent Indiana
19 County and we have two of the larger coal fire electric
20 generation plants within Pennsylvania. And to me the
21 implementation of RGGI, especially given the way that it was
22 undertaken through an executive order, is simply a
23 nightmare. It continues the assault on the energy industry.
24 It continues an assault on rural Pennsylvania.
25 And I'm calling it a nightmare because the people
59 1 in my communities are afraid. And excuse me if I'm a little
2 bit passionate about this but I see them every day. And
3 they're worried about their jobs. The power plants have
4 already told us if RGGI is implemented -- and you know they
5 operate on a very thin margin -- they're going to close and
6 they're going to go to other states. That's thousands of
7 rural jobs. That's families that will be impacted. That's
8 schools that will lose tax revenue. So it really concerns
9 me, you know, the whole process, but that gets to my
10 question.
11 You mentioned in your testimony that there will
12 be stakeholder engagement.
13 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
14 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: First of all, who are
15 the stakeholders? What is that process? When can we expect
16 to hear some of the feedback that you're receiving?
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
18 So there's a number of things on my end. I don't
19 think there's a week that goes by where there's not at least
20 one or two meetings with external parties on this. And it's
21 everything from generation owners. I know the Governor's
22 Office has been engaged with labor, environmental groups,
23 legislators, others. You know, we've been engaged. And I
24 know staff, if I'm doing a couple of those, they're doing
25 five times that in terms of some of that engagement.
60 1 And one other thing to point out is on the other
2 side of it is the environmental justice community and some
3 of the impacts that they see in terms of air quality and
4 making sure opportunity is there.
5 I think, to be blunt, I'd say I share a lot of
6 those same concerns that you laid out. And that's one of
7 the reasons why I think this is an important tool and an
8 important process for us. The reality is we see -- and if
9 we do nothing, we see modeling that shows plan after plan
10 after plan and the coal sector closing over time. So
11 figuring out, one, you know, managing the greenhouse gas
12 piece of this is important but this gives us a lot of tools
13 to have a conversation around resources available for
14 communities that are dealing with this.
15 I know Senator Pittman identified carbon capture
16 in storage as something of interest. I think that's
17 something of interest to me. I'll be blunt and say 20 years
18 in the Department and there's been a lot of conversation
19 about carbon capture in storage and it always feels like
20 it's five or ten years away for the last 20 years. But I
21 feel like there's a focus and more resources looking at
22 those kinds of issues, particularly as you have major
23 corporations not just saying they want to go net zero but
24 saying they want to go below that and actually take carbon
25 out.
61 1 As we see those kind of pressures within the
2 energy market, the investment community, availability of
3 capital, us having a seat at that table through something
4 like RGGI I think is critical.
5 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: I appreciate that.
6 Let me be clear. I think we all want to do
7 what's right for the environment. And the belief is that
8 implementation of RGGI will prematurely close these
9 coal-fired electric generation plants and we don't want to
10 see that happen.
11 When you finish with stakeholder inquiries and
12 all the information gathering -- well, first of all, are you
13 going to come to Indiana County? because I know we've
14 invited the Governor and yourself. I mean, I think it's
15 important to sit down face-to-face with these people who
16 will be directly impacted, you know, to hear their
17 perspective on things. But what is the balance? You know,
18 what is the balance between air quality and the loss of
19 jobs, the impact on Pennsylvania's economy?
20 We had the Independent Fiscal Office in here last
21 week and I asked them if they had done any studies or any
22 modeling to look at the economic impacts of RGGI and they
23 had done none, which deeply concerns me. So where is that
24 balance? I mean, is there a point where if you conduct and
25 finish all your stakeholder and, you know, visits around the
62 1 state or what have you, is there a point where you'll say to
2 the Governor, look, this isn't going to make sense, it's not
3 going to work out?
4 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: A couple things I'd
5 say. One is I think the word you used, balance, is
6 important in this.
7 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: Right.
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: This is not air
9 quality versus jobs. This is the balancing of those two
10 things and, in fact, the way those two things support one
11 another within the context of this conversation.
12 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: Right.
13 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: The reality is what
14 we see right now is closure of these plants being supplanted
15 within the market by natural gas because of a low natural
16 gas price environment. We see year over year reduction in
17 the installed cost of renewable energy resources which is
18 further driving some of these dynamics.
19 So making sure that we're having a conversation
20 about the resources that are available to make sure we're
21 supportive of these communities -- I mean, one of the things
22 that kind of gets lost in the conversation as we talk about
23 this as a state, but really what we've seen is a movement of
24 our electricity infrastructure from the western side of the
25 state to the north central and northeastern side of the
63 1 state.
2 So as that continues to happen, as it seems like
3 it will, how do we manage what's left behind there? Right.
4 What is available in terms of renewable energy, gas
5 opportunity, other things within that space?
6 You know, the example I used in one of the recent
7 hearings was Bruce Mansfield was scheduled to close in 2021.
8 September they said we're closing in November. And that was
9 the notice. Two months and they are done. How do we make
10 sure we're creating opportunities so that no community is
11 completely dependent on anyone, manufacturer, business,
12 etc.?
13 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: Right.
14 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Right.
15 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: Thank you. We're out of
16 time. But I urge you to please consider the impacts on
17 Pennsylvanians and communities and families.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure. Absolutely.
19 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: Thank you.
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: You're welcome.
21 REPRESENTATIVE STRUZZI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
22 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Next is Representative
23 Comitta.
24 REPRESENTATIVE COMITTA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
25 Good morning, Secretary McDonnell.
64 1 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good morning.
2 REPRESENTATIVE COMITTA: Thank you so much for
3 being here.
4 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: My pleasure.
5 REPRESENTATIVE COMITTA: As you know, in my
6 district in Chester County it's old pipelines all the time.
7 And in the districts, other districts in Chester and
8 Delaware County where the Mariner Pipeline goes through
9 densely populated areas or high consequence areas, as we
10 call them, siting is a concern. But we know right now there
11 is no authority over siting.
12 So my question is about strengthening safety
13 regulations. I know that the DEP is in the beginning stages
14 of updating Chapter 105, the Water Obstruction and
15 Encroachment Permit Regulations, one of the basic permits
16 that pipelines are required to get.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
18 REPRESENTATIVE COMITTA: I also understand you're
19 looking at Chapter 102, Erosion and Sediment Requirements,
20 as well, at least with respect to the permit fees. So given
21 all the problems with the construction of the Mariner East
22 Pipeline as well as the landslide that resulted in that
23 devastating explosion of the pipeline in Beaver County only
24 a week after it was put into operation, I'd like to know,
25 are you taking some of the lessons learned and incorporating
65 1 special provisions in these regulations for pipelines,
2 thinking of issues like identification of private water
3 supplies, detailed geological analysis for sinkholes and
4 landslide risks, notification of adjacent property owners,
5 incorporating best management practices for preventing
6 discharges of drilling fluids at stream crossings, and more
7 comprehensive restoration requirements?
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you for the
9 question.
10 It's not something I would even begin to put into
11 a bucket of 105 or 102 or any of that. There's a number of
12 things that we're doing. Some of what is within the 105 reg
13 includes frankly making more explicit requirements under
14 105(13), which is where the application requirements are,
15 what some of the things that have to be in the application I
16 think are more meaningful in terms of some of the specific
17 questions there are. And out of one of the settlements
18 related to the pipeline, there's two work groups looking at
19 specific issues, one being at the time it was horizontal
20 drilling, directional drilling, now it's in a technical --
21 draft technical guidance document related to technologies
22 because HDD is only one of those that I think provides a lot
23 more clarity around the expectation and around some of what
24 you said, geologic and the best management practices.
25 The other technical guidance document is related
66 1 to wetlands and, in particular, the alternative analysis
2 that we do around wetland impacts, which, again, I think is
3 meaningful.
4 The one piece of what you said that I definitely
5 need to mention, the private drinking water supply is not
6 something we have any regulatory authority around. So our
7 ability to identify, let alone regulate that, is somewhat
8 limited. You know, frankly, the permit has included some
9 provisions outside of what is normally within our permits
10 related to the identification of some of that. But there
11 isn't a great resource or database that identifies all of
12 the private drinking water wells out there and that's in
13 part because of the lack of regulatory authority around
14 that.
15 And then again -- the one thing I just want to
16 point out, because the safety piece isn't necessarily
17 directly within DEP but the Governor's Office, is certainly
18 highlighting the siting issue, communication with local
19 government, schools, daycares, etc., as an issue that he
20 wants to work to get solved legislatively.
21 REPRESENTATIVE COMITTA: Thank you very much.
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
23 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative Dunbar.
24 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
25 Welcome back.
67 1 And, Secretary, good to see you again.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good to see you.
3 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: I had heard earlier
4 someone mention that this Appropriation hearing and funding
5 -- if you would just look at the General Fund, the funding
6 looks like it's increased by 27 percent. But once you
7 eliminate all the financial gains and fiscal gimmicks that
8 we've tended to do over the years, is the number what, about
9 4 and a half? 4.5 percent is actually the increased
10 funding; is that correct?
11 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
12 I haven't looked specifically but my guess is
13 between 2 and a half million for the Bay and the air quality
14 that was discussed and costs to carry that sounds about
15 right.
16 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: Yeah.
17 And I also heard mention of 2002 fully funding --
18 underfunding, and it always leads one to believe, based on a
19 prior year's number, you're making the assumption that the
20 prior year number was the actual funding level, so I don't
21 think we can say underfunded based upon a 2002 number, which
22 leads us to what me and you have talked about quite often,
23 performance-based budgeting where we're not looking at a
24 dollar figure from the prior year. We're looking at goals
25 and objectives and accomplishing those goals and objectives.
68 1 And this year you were up this year in a five-year cycle.
2 And there was a lot of positive things that came out of
3 that. And I'll highlight a couple of them. Well permits
4 processed on time from 31 percent up to 97 percent, a 40
5 percent increase in the number of inspections per inspector.
6 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
7 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: You know, as far as
8 average calendar days to issue permits, erosion and
9 sedimentary control permits, had gone from 123 days down to
10 89 days. So all good things. Also some negative things
11 were in there. And in our discussions, we talked about that
12 you're only up once every five years but are you committed
13 to continue to look at these numbers on an annual basis?
14 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
15 And frankly, beyond those numbers, because what
16 immediately popped into my head as you were describing, for
17 example, are oil and gas inspection numbers, the
18 productivity of that has increased. As I mentioned, there's
19 some places we're not getting to. And in particular one of
20 the things that we're now looking at is, where are those
21 places that we haven't done that?
22 So, you know, it's not one piece of data. It's
23 several pieces that we need to marry, manage, figure out,
24 you know, and make sure we're attentive to.
25 I think one of the outcomes of the budget
69 1 conversation that's happened in terms of what happened to
2 the Department over time is -- you know I've said this
3 before -- the first things you end up cutting, right, are
4 training, IT, travel, those kinds of things, which are
5 critical for us to be able to have good process, good
6 review. So we're catching up with that now and have a
7 significant commitment on the IT side, training side, etc.
8 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: And like we had discussed
9 earlier, good numbers, which I highlighted good numbers --
10 and like I said, there were bad numbers as well, but I'm
11 trying to be positive here -- good numbers could be an
12 anomaly. If we did this on an annual basis, we can actually
13 determine trends and find out what the proper level of
14 funding is.
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: My staff has heard
16 me say we do not manage numbers, we manage trends.
17 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: You're good.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: And that is
19 absolutely --
20 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: And with that being said,
21 I do want to go back to where Representative Greiner was
22 originally when he was talking about the Governor's Budget
23 Book. There's a line on there that says eliminate -- the
24 goal is to eliminate the permit application backlog.
25 Last year's budget line it said the number of
70 1 outstanding, as of this date, as of 6/30/2018, last year, it
2 said it was 1,100 for 6/30/18 and 545 estimated 6/30/19.
3 This year the same exact line says that 6/30/18 was not
4 applicable and at 6/30/19 it says there's 8,700, so
5 something is wrong there.
6 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yeah.
7 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: And something needs to be
8 -- because I'll be honest with you. I've worked with you on
9 these numbers. I appreciate where we're at. I highlighted
10 positive numbers. But I go back to early computer classes I
11 had back in the '70s, I guess it was -- I'm aging myself --
12 but one of the terms we used was GIGO, garbage in/garbage
13 out.
14 I need to be assured that the numbers that we're
15 looking at don't have garbage going in. So if we don't have
16 an answer to what's going on here, what is the right
17 numbers, because it does affect a lot of the calculations
18 we're looking at.
19 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
20 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: Do you have any idea what
21 happened there?
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I need to ask
23 staff. The only other piece I know -- and this goes to
24 making sure we're managing kind of the totality of it as
25 opposed to single things -- is the permit decision guarantee
71 1 piece of it does not cover every permit. And as I said,
2 some things end up falling outside of that process.
3 There's another piece of this called the Permit
4 Review Process, PRP, that has its own pieces to it, and
5 we've become more attentive to that. So what I don't know
6 is if we updated some of those numbers prematurely.
7 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: And I don't -- like I
8 said, it is blatantly wrong. There's something blatantly
9 wrong there.
10 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
11 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: And if you can get us an
12 answer, it would be appreciated.
13 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
14 REPRESENTATIVE DUNBAR: Because then it will then
15 just add to the confidence we have in the other information
16 that will be produced on an annual basis.
17 Thank you.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
19 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative
20 Schweyer.
21 REPRESENTATIVE SCHWEYER: Thank you, Mr.
22 Chairman.
23 Mr. Secretary, good morning.
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good morning.
25 REPRESENTATIVE SCHWEYER: I'm going to revisit
72 1 from a slightly different perspective than some of my
2 colleagues' questions regarding RGGI and some of the
3 intentions there.
4 We've heard a lot of conversations so far about
5 potential job losses, etc., etc., in certain segments of our
6 economy. What I understand -- and I'm going to ask you to
7 expand upon it because we have been financially supporting
8 this industry.
9 I understand a little bit about your set-aside
10 for the waste coal plants as part of RGGI. Can you explain
11 that, what your intentions are? I understand that not all
12 the regulations have been promulgated but if you could start
13 by explaining sort of what your thoughts are on that topic.
14 Thank you.
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
16 So within the context of whatever the cap is --
17 and we're still doing the modeling to identify that -- what
18 we did was went back and identified over the last three-year
19 period what the highest emission amounts were from the waste
20 coal sector. And for those who may not know, these are
21 plants that operate burning old coal piles across the state
22 to produce electricity and, again, more carbon intensive
23 frankly in terms of the work that gets done there. That
24 number is 7.9 million tons. So that comes off the top of
25 the cap.
73 1 The reason for that is -- and anybody who has
2 gone through in particular some of the north central and
3 northeastern parts of the state will see, they'll be driving
4 down a street road that suddenly hangs a left to go around a
5 pile that's been there. These are piles that don't just
6 have an aesthetic impact, but they have a water-quality
7 impact in terms of sediment and leaching going into our
8 streams. They have air-quality impacts where we've had
9 these piles end up on fire across the state.
10 So making sure that RGGI is not impactful on the
11 important restoration work that is happening within that
12 sector was something we highlighted as being important.
13 REPRESENTATIVE SCHWEYER: I appreciate that.
14 I represent the city of Allentown in the Lehigh
15 Valley. The northeast has a number of these plants.
16 Northampton County, our neighboring county, has a bunch of
17 them, left-over residue from the industrial revolution,
18 Bethlehem Steel, etc., etc., etc., throughout the
19 Commonwealth. And we have noted before that we have had and
20 we continue to have a tax credit for these plants because of
21 the land reclamation and water reclamation that they're
22 providing.
23 So understanding that they are -- it's
24 complicated because we do understand that they do produce
25 quite a bit of CO2 and greenhouse gasses. At the same time,
74 1 in my opinion, I don't see any other way that we're going to
2 be able to reclaim this land and clean up the streams and
3 things like that around it.
4 I wanted to make sure that we were able to
5 discuss briefly today that it's your goal to make sure that
6 RGGI doesn't destroy this industry; otherwise, these slide
7 piles are not going absolutely anywhere.
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Correct.
9 And the one thing I would want to say on the
10 reverse side of it is, some of the conversations we just had
11 earlier, these plants are subjected to exactly the same
12 forces.
13 REPRESENTATIVE SCHWEYER: Right.
14 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So we've seen
15 closures. We've heard announced closures of some of these
16 plants in the future. And unlike a lot of other plants,
17 they have a physics issue, right, that they deal with. The
18 plant is here. They located it there 20 years ago. They've
19 dealt with all the piles around them. They're getting
20 further and further out and the transportation cost of both
21 bringing in the material and bringing it back is very
22 expensive.
23 So at a minimum this keeps even, but some of
24 those same market forces continue to be an issue within that
25 space.
75 1 REPRESENTATIVE SCHWEYER: Understood.
2 And one of the challenges with this particular
3 industry.
4 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Right.
5 REPRESENTATIVE SCHWEYER: So thank you, Mr.
6 Secretary.
7 That's all you have, Mr. Chairman.
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
9 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative
10 Wheeland.
11 REPRESENTATIVE WHEELAND: Thank you, Mr.
12 Chairman.
13 Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for your
14 testimony today.
15 Does DEP ever award grant monies to individuals
16 or organizations outside of the Commonwealth of
17 Pennsylvania?
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: That's a good
19 question. I'm not 100 percent certain of the answer.
20 REPRESENTATIVE WHEELAND: Could you get back to
21 us on that?
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
23 REPRESENTATIVE WHEELAND: Please let us know.
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
25 REPRESENTATIVE WHEELAND: And how much does DEP
76 1 spend yearly on educational outreach, public relations, or
2 marketing?
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I'm not sure of the
4 amount on the communication side, but that's something we
5 can certainly get. And then, you know, 5 percent are fines
6 and penalties going into the Environmental Education
7 Account, for example. So we give out grants and operate the
8 Environmental Education Center out of DEP that supports
9 environmental education across the Commonwealth.
10 REPRESENTATIVE WHEELAND: The reason I bring that
11 up -- and I do want to thank you -- is just recently within
12 the last year, year and a half, you did boots on the ground
13 up in north central Pennsylvania. And you saw firsthand the
14 devastation of some significant wet water events that we had
15 up there.
16 And just recently between the 83rd District and
17 the 84th District we have a state highway now that has been
18 completely shut down. And the primary reason, from what I
19 understand, is a strain that decided to choose its own way.
20 And of course, nothing was done about it.
21 It's almost like the adage -- I remember an old
22 adage -- you know, if you ignore a problem, it will go away.
23 I think the new modified one is that if you ignore the
24 problem, it will slide over into somebody else's budget,
25 because PennDOT now is faced with a multi-million-dollar
77 1 fix. And we'll be having a hearing with them coming up
2 soon. And I'm going to ask them the same question, if they
3 appreciate the fact that our stream banks are being ignored
4 and raising havoc with their budget.
5 So I just question if this time where we have
6 more need, some of these budget items, should it not be
7 diverted to fix immediate problems that ultimately are going
8 to cost us, whether it's in your budget or PennDOT's budget
9 or DCNR's budget or anybody's budget within the State, folks
10 that deal with taxpayer money, would it not be better to
11 start fixing some of these problems?
12 And one other thing -- I do want to thank you --
13 the fact that we're able to get underneath our bridges and
14 clean out the sand and gravel bars. That's been very
15 helpful because water does a lot better when it goes under a
16 bridge rather than over top of it.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
18 REPRESENTATIVE WHEELAND: But we do have
19 significant problems, as you saw firsthand. And I really
20 would encourage some dialogue getting those, our budgetary
21 priorities, in line.
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So a couple things,
23 again within that. And thank you for all of the work and
24 attention up in your region related to this. One is we have
25 tried to be more communicative about this making it very
78 1 clear, you know, the red light, yellow light, green light
2 kind of documents out there about here's what you can and
3 can't do in a stream.
4 We have a pilot project we're engaged in with
5 Bradford County to allow them to do some emergency
6 permitting and training of folks up there. I didn't
7 mention, as we were having the 105, 102 reg discussion
8 earlier, some of what we want to do within those regs is
9 simplify a process. Frankly, the types of things you need
10 to do to address some of these issues are not just about
11 keeping the stream where it is, but also flood protection,
12 stream bank erosion, you know, sediment going downstream.
13 It's water quality. It's flood protection. It's all of it,
14 right, all mixed together.
15 And some of what we're looking at in 102 and 105
16 is, how do we simplify those processes for people who are
17 trying to do environmentally responsible activities, right?
18 So making sure we are supportive of those.
19 The last thing I think important to mention
20 within this, because it's been background of a lot of the
21 conversation around here is, you know, we have seen 10
22 percent increase in precipitation across the state. We
23 modeled out to see another 8 percent, 14 percent, you know 8
24 percent increase across the State between now and 2050, 14
25 percent winter precipitation in that same time frame.
79 1 We're going to see more storms that are heavier,
2 more located, and, in particular, in an area with glaciated
3 soils, as you have, that's exactly where we see those
4 impacts, right, so being attentive to that is important.
5 REPRESENTATIVE WHEELAND: Well, thank you very
6 much. But, you know, we got to quit studying it and we have
7 to start fixing it. And I think there's money in this
8 budget that can be diverted from outside entities. We
9 really do need to start fixing our internal problems because
10 it's just costing too much money elsewhere.
11 Thank you.
12 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
13 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative
14 Krueger.
15 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
16 Hi, Mr. Secretary. Thank you so much for joining
17 us here today.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
19 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: I want to say first that
20 I'm glad that this is different from last year's hearings
21 where we spent a lot of time talking about restricted
22 environmental funds. And I was very pleased to see in the
23 proposal that we're not proposing to use the Environmental
24 Stewardship Fund or the Recycling Fund. These are clearly
25 restricted funds for environmental protection and we
80 1 shouldn't be using them to fill a budget hole.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Agreed.
3 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: Again, very different
4 from last year's conversation. I'm happy that we're in this
5 place and the Governor proposed this budget.
6 I also was pleased to hear the Governor mention
7 pipeline safety for the first time in his budget address
8 before the General Assembly. In Delaware County, where I'm
9 from, this is a never-ending issue. It's in the local paper
10 all of the time. We've seen sinkholes and just lots of
11 devastation in private property and we need to be doing as
12 much as we can to address this.
13 So I know that my colleague Carolyn Comitta asked
14 about what you were doing with updates to Chapter 105 and
15 102 regulations. You know, the PUC is also looking at
16 potentially regulations related to public safety. When a
17 sinkhole opens up in the path of a pipeline, it's not the
18 DEP, it's the PUC who needs to respond, and yet they will
19 not be coming before us to testify.
20 Is there anything else the DEP could be doing
21 from a vantage point of safety related to pipelines?
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: We talked about
23 this a little bit earlier. I mean, one, I think beyond even
24 the budget address within the Budget itself, the Governor
25 has called for action on a number of things related to
81 1 communication with community setback, you know, safety
2 setback requirements, siting requirements, etc.
3 In terms of -- I think one of the things that
4 will help -- and I referenced this earlier -- is a technical
5 guidance document that we're developing in conjunction with
6 a stakeholder group that came out of some of the pipeline
7 litigation around trenchless technologies and best practices
8 there to make sure we're mitigating some of those impacts.
9 I will go back to something I said earlier, one
10 of the particular issues that we struggle with; and this is
11 the private water wells where we do not have a legislative
12 or regulatory authority for those wells. So we don't know
13 where they are. And if we did know where they are, we
14 wouldn't have oversight over casing and other things that
15 you would want to see within that.
16 Those are a couple of very quick thoughts.
17 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: And I know a lot of the
18 actions that the Governor has talked about would require
19 legislative authority.
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Correct.
21 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: The water regulation,
22 that's the same, correct, you would need us to grant?
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Some, yes. And
24 then as I said, the technical guidance document, I think,
25 you know, we have legal authorities around. And then some
82 1 of the clarifications that we're doing within Chapter 105 in
2 terms of moving some things that aren't currently in the
3 application portion of the reg into that portion to make it
4 clear that those are things that need to be submitted as
5 part of the application, for example, are helpful.
6 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: There's many good bills
7 that have been proposed by both sides of the aisle that have
8 gone to Committee with no further action, so I'm glad to
9 hear that there's things that the Administration can move
10 forward on.
11 I know that there's a small increase to your
12 complement staffing included in this Budget. Are any of
13 those new positions related to pipeline safety?
14 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: No. It's
15 Chesapeake Bay, ten positions, and then 15 positions in air
16 quality.
17 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: And I also noticed that
18 there was some positions that were authorized but not
19 filled. Any of the unfilled position related to pipeline
20 safety currently?
21 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: No.
22 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: Okay.
23 Last question. In Delaware County another issue
24 we've been dealing with is this strong petroleum odor that
25 has swept the county a number of times in the past five
83 1 months. Our emergency responders are perplexed. Your
2 regional staff had been on the ground. And I know that you
3 recently sent the mobile lab to help see if we could figure
4 out what the source of this is. It took a while to get it
5 there. Is there only one mobile lab in Pennsylvania right
6 now?
7 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
8 We have one called the MAU, Mobile Analytical
9 Unit, that we use for these kind of air quality events.
10 In addition to that, we're partnering with the
11 State Police to do some aerial testing as well to gather
12 some data there. And some of that is we're trying to grab
13 background so if there is another event that we can then be
14 able to have some basis of comparison in terms of what it
15 is, where it might be coming from.
16 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: And I've sat in on a
17 number of those briefing meetings.
18 Just the last question. Is there a need for
19 another mobile lab or is the current one meeting the demand?
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: That's a discussion
21 I can have with Martina McGarvey, who is our Bureau of Labs
22 Director, about whether there's a capacity concern. That
23 has not been brought to my attention but that's not to say
24 there isn't one there or an issue there.
25 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: I'd appreciate a
84 1 followup on that.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
3 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: Thank you, Mr.
4 Secretary.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
6 REPRESENTATIVE KRUEGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
7 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative Owlett.
8 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: Thank you for joining us
9 today.
10 I have a question on fees and some of the
11 increases. What's your position on and the status of the
12 fee increases for your regulatory programs to address
13 staffing issues such as the current proposal to increase the
14 unconventional well permit fee from 5,000 to 12,500?
15 Can you explain the significant increase
16 especially as the permits and the applications that are
17 coming through are on a decline and how much of this revenue
18 do you see to come in for the State from that?
19 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
20 So within oil and gas in particular, basically
21 the way that program is funded -- and this goes back a
22 number of years now -- is through those permit application
23 fees.
24 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: Okay.
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Every time we get
85 1 one of those application fees, it is not just funding the
2 review of that permit. It is funding the oversight of the
3 program and every other well in the state. So the money
4 that we get from the well today is funding all of the
5 inspection, oversight, reports, reg development, policy
6 development, that happens within the program more broadly.
7 So, you know, I think -- I feel like I've said in
8 this Committee it's probably not -- it's probably the worst
9 way to do the funding for this program is tie it to those
10 application fees because the reality of what we've seen over
11 time, both because of market forces and efficiencies within
12 the industry, is the number of applications come down year
13 over year. So at the point at which this is funding through
14 this $12,500.00 fee, that keeps us steady at the 190
15 positions that we currently have. It does not lead to an
16 increase in staff. It's to keep us just be exactly where we
17 are at currently.
18 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: Well, that leads me to
19 another question. Given the DEP receives about $6 million a
20 year in Act 13 impact fees, which is our version of a
21 severance tax, wouldn't this money be used to help offset
22 some of those costs?
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: All of that money
24 goes to the Oil and Gas Program in fact. Yes, it does
25 offset those program costs.
86 1 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: Okay.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: And this just shows
3 how quickly some of these numbers change. When we did the
4 fee analysis a couple of years ago, that $6 million was seen
5 as a buffer that might allow us to bring on more staff or if
6 there's a change in the industry. Now that we're two years
7 further into the future, we have been assuming about 2,000
8 permit applications a year. The actual number is closer to
9 1,500. So that 6 million is what essentially fills in that
10 gap even with the increase in the fee.
11 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: I just have another
12 question on fees verses taxes. I know every year during the
13 Budget address, at least my last two, there's no new taxes.
14 I was asked this question the other day. In your mind, what
15 is the difference between a fee and a tax? It seems like
16 fees are going up like crazy and people feel that -- people
17 really do feel that in my community. They ask me about it
18 all the time. Yet we say there's no tax increases. So what
19 in your mind is the difference between a fee and a tax?
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So in terms of that
21 impact, I won't speak to what anybody's particular feelings
22 on it are. I think the specific response I would give is,
23 you know, the fees go -- you know, in the case of, for
24 example, those permit fees go or Oil and Gas Plugging Fund,
25 which is not the best name because it's actually the fund
87 1 that funds the entire program despite it having -- you know,
2 just plugging in the name, so it's a fee paid to support
3 that specific regulatory activity and support.
4 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: But it's not an option,
5 right? A fee -- I mean, even the fees are not options.
6 Taxes are not options.
7 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: No.
8 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: You have to pay them,
9 right?
10 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I'd say it's tied
11 to level of effort. And, you know, I referenced some of
12 this earlier where I think there's always a good and healthy
13 discussion about what is the right balance between General
14 Fund revenue and fee revenue.
15 The reality is, you know, the other element of
16 that becomes if someone wants to do a development activity,
17 drill a well, put in place a warehouse, having the generator
18 of that work to pay for some portion, if not all, of that
19 work also makes sense, right. So having some reasonable tie
20 between those things I think is important.
21 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: I see I'm out of time.
22 I just want you to know that even increasing
23 fees, that is passed on to the constituents that I serve and
24 that we all serve across the Commonwealth, so they do feel
25 that inasmuch as a tax as well.
88 1 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
2 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: Thank you for coming in
3 today.
4 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: And even that, you
5 know, increase in the oil and gas well fee, for example, was
6 something we looked at compared to the conventional well
7 industry, you know, the unconventional fee, in terms of
8 percentage of the cost of actually doing that well, very,
9 very small on both ends.
10 So we do try to balance those kinds of things out
11 in terms of what those economic impacts are while making
12 sure -- and I think even those in Industry would agree it's
13 important for them to have a good permitting and oversight
14 process to give public confidence around the activity.
15 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: Thank you very much.
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
17 REPRESENTATIVE OWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
18 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative
19 Lawrence.
20 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: Thank you, Mr.
21 Chairman.
22 And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here
23 today.
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: My pleasure.
25 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: I want to ask about an
89 1 issue that's generated quite a number of e-mails, calls, and
2 letters to my office. Does DEP have a position for or
3 against the sale of Chester Water Authority?
4 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I don't think we
5 have a position in either case but it's not something that
6 I've weighed in on.
7 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: So as I'm sure you're
8 aware, Chester Water Authority has proposed placing some of
9 its assets, including the outdoor air reservoir, in a trust
10 to protect these key environmental resources for generations
11 to come. A letter by DEP Assistant Counsel Gina Thomas that
12 I have here dated June 18, 2019, states the DEP will not
13 take a position one way or the other on this matter.
14 I have to say I was surprised by this, that the
15 DEP would not jump at the chance to support protecting these
16 key environmental resources. However, I was even more
17 surprised to learn that DEP on August 9th of 2019 reversed
18 course and filed a post-hearing response in Delaware County
19 Orphans Court explicitly taking a position against Chester
20 Water Authority in this matter. This really surprised me
21 since 26 municipalities across Chester and Delaware Counties
22 have passed resolutions supporting Chester Water.
23 Mr. Secretary, this is a serious matter. Can you
24 tell me why did DEP change its position on this matter and
25 who in DEP made the decision to change its position?
90 1 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: As I said a moment
2 ago, I don't know anything about decisions related to that
3 right now.
4 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: And I'm not trying to
5 put you on the spot. I'm sure you're aware that this is an
6 issue of significant interest to many thousands, maybe
7 hundreds of thousands, of individuals across southern
8 Chester County, western and southern Delaware County as
9 well. Are you saying you are not aware of this matter
10 that's been taken by your Assistant Counsel Gina Thomas?
11 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sitting here today
12 I'm not, no. I'd need to go back and verify. And again, I
13 mean -- and the reason I'm saying that we're talking about
14 it at the broadest possible level, I don't know if there's
15 specific elements of this that raised a concern from a
16 regulatory standpoint, from things under the Safe Drinking
17 Water Act or other things, so I'd need to understand with a
18 little more specificity what the particular issues being
19 raised within the action are.
20 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: The specific issue at
21 hand is that Chester Water is looking to place the outdoor
22 air reservoir and other key environmental resources into a
23 perpetual trust to protect these resources for generations
24 to come. This is not, I think, entirely dissimilar to the
25 Court decision Robinson Township v. Commonwealth of
91 1 Pennsylvania, which I'm sure you're also very familiar with.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
3 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: I think it was striking
4 that DEP took a position against this proposal.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: And as I said, I
6 would need to go back and consult with staff to see what the
7 specific issues in that case were.
8 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: Are you aware of any
9 conversations between DEP and DCED or the Governor's Office
10 with regard to the potential sale of Chester Water
11 Authority?
12 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Again, I have not
13 had any conversations. I'm not aware of any, no,
14 specifically.
15 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: Okay.
16 Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I look
17 forward to your responses.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
19 REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE: Thank you, Mr.
20 Chairman.
21 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
22 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Mr. Secretary, would
23 you get that response to the Committee as soon as possible?
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
25 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Since it seems like a
92 1 very critical issue.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
3 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: I think the sooner we
4 have that answer, the better.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
6 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: With that we'll move
7 on to Representative Brown.
8 REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
9 Good morning, Mr. Secretary.
10 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good morning.
11 REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: I think you're almost
12 done. I think.
13 This budget proposes a $1 per ton increase in the
14 tipping fee on municipal waste landfill deposits, expected
15 to, I think, generate about $22 million to replace funding
16 for the Hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund, which we spoke about
17 very briefly before.
18 One of the things in an area of very high cost of
19 living, my colleagues, I'm always talking about our school
20 property tax bill and that level of how high that is in the
21 Pocono region. So with that I'm also always looking at the
22 other bills that are in a household for constituents, what
23 we're doing on a budget level, what we're doing on a policy
24 level, that could affect those bills.
25 From what my research has showed me, it appears
93 1 that one-third of the cost of trash, trash bill, is really
2 for disposal fees. And my concern is this request for this
3 increase, the tipping fee on that, the effect that it could
4 have on a trash bill, which is, you know, another bill that
5 is of concern in my area. What are your thoughts first on
6 that piece of it?
7 And I find concern with a few things that I might
8 continue to ask you as we move forward, that the initial
9 primary revenue source for this was the Capital Stock and
10 Franchise Tax, which was phased out back in 2015-'16. I'm
11 curious as to why we really didn't address it all until now.
12 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure. No. Thank
13 you for all that.
14 And to take the last piece first, I'll say there
15 was really two pieces. One, I mean -- and to be candid, I
16 think I've raised this every year as an issue that we were
17 going to have to deal with. We had two dynamics going on
18 within the fund, which has now created the issue today.
19 One is the 40 million going away but there were
20 tailing revenues that kept coming in and frankly still come
21 in on Capital Stock and Franchise Tax that continue to
22 provide resources. And then there's also about $20 million
23 in transfer that now comes out of Act 13 dollars.
24 So we had a scenario where we were normally
25 getting 40. We had a year where we got 60. And we had a
94 1 balance so we've been spending that down. The situation
2 we're in now is if you look at our budget, we'll end this
3 year with about $20 million but we'll get about $20 million
4 from Act 13 around the May time period. So we're going to
5 become pretty cash constrained this year. This is funding
6 for programs that I think everybody agrees are absolutely
7 necessary. It's our Hazardous Waste Oversight Program.
8 It's our match for Federal Superfund. It's the State's
9 version of Superfund and Cleanup, which in and of itself is
10 about $26 million a year, as well as the Brownfields
11 support, the Act 2 inventory programs and a couple of other
12 grants.
13 I'll say candidly I think the dollar is an
14 appropriate way to do that. We haven't seen an increase in
15 tipping fees since I think 2004 with Growing Greener 2. And
16 certainly inflation would have driven that up further. I
17 think on the eastern part of the State you're tipping fees
18 are well over $100, so that is in particular a driver, which
19 also leads to the dollar being a relatively small portion of
20 that.
21 All of that said, I think we are interested in
22 making sure that the programs continue. And the way I often
23 describe these programs is not just as program dollars but
24 insurance dollars. They're what allow us to make immediate
25 decisions to go out and address some big fairly capital
95 1 intensive projects.
2 REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Right.
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So making sure that
4 funding is available, particularly as we start to look at
5 PFAS and emergent contaminants, is the most important part.
6 And if there's other ways of funding that, I think we're all
7 ears.
8 REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: So the -- and I agree with
9 you that it is an important fund to have. So I'm hearing
10 from you that about 40 million would be expected as of this
11 year to be your base, the 20 million and then the 20
12 million. The other piece that I always think when we try to
13 stay away from anything new, as Representative Owlett
14 stated, you know, a fee or an increase can then generate --
15 and I also look at how it comes down to the people and their
16 expectations of us to utilize what we already have before we
17 do something new.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Right.
19 REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: And I know it was
20 mentioned a little earlier about the Recycling Fund in a
21 different conversation that we're having this year. But
22 that's a pretty hefty, strong fund. And we have dollars
23 there. We have utilized them before. Have you considered
24 using those funds rather than going to this tipping fee and
25 kind of increasing it this way?
96 1 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: We haven't.
2 And honestly, I'll admit the way the Recycling
3 Fund in particular gets shown is something that we keep
4 trying to figure out some better way to show it in terms of
5 the Treasury Report. The reality is within that fund are
6 varied commitments that don't show up within the fund. So
7 it looks like a healthy balance is more like less than 20
8 million today in terms of uncommitted dollars and that's to
9 fund the next round of those supports for municipalities.
10 REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
11 I know we're out of time but if you could give us
12 any more details on that fund, that would be greatly
13 appreciated. And I think that we do owe that to the people
14 before we move forward with anything else.
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
16 REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Thank you so much.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
18 REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
19 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative
20 Rothman.
21 REPRESENTATIVE ROTHMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
22 Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here.
23 I will go full circle to the first question,
24 permits and the permit paralysis. I know the Department has
25 made significant changes in the last three or four years and
97 1 I appreciate that. I know we'll get questions about where
2 the backload is.
3 My specific question is, it's my understanding
4 that the DEP remains one of the only departments in the
5 State that doesn't use outside third-party reviewers. And
6 while the Department of Transportation does on a regular
7 basis almost exclusively now, is there any -- your thoughts
8 on why we don't use third-party reviewers? Is that
9 something you'd be willing to do? These people end up
10 having the same expertise as your staff in many cases, at
11 least the same education.
12 And I understand when you use the counties and
13 the extensions, the county offices, that it is a third-party
14 reviewer, but outside private-sector third-party reviewers,
15 any thoughts or why the resistance to using them?
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
17 REPRESENTATIVE ROTHMAN: Thank you.
18 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So, one, we
19 specifically, as you said, delegate certain of our 102 and
20 105 authorities to county conservation districts. Not all
21 of them do it, but that is an activity we've engaged in.
22 I think there is a number of concerns raised
23 within the third-party review context. One is conflict
24 issues. If they're reviewing our permits, then they're
25 probably only reviewing our permits and not submitting
98 1 permits themselves.
2 We have Federal delegation issues where we cannot
3 delegate Federal responsibilities down to a third party, a
4 lot of our permits, most of our permits, in general, Federal
5 air quality, Federal water quality, Federal Resource
6 Conservation Recovery Act requirements.
7 In addition, there's things we've looked at in
8 terms of some of the cost pieces. You know, I know I've
9 seen versions of this where the fee goes toward the
10 third-party reviewer in some cases for the reviewer.
11 Frankly, that's a really, really good deal. We talked about
12 oil and gas. If they get the entirety of that permit fee,
13 one, it's a lot of money for that permit review but, two,
14 it's also not having money for the inspection and oversight
15 programs that we have.
16 And then there's other places where frankly to
17 this day we have a permit that might cost $100, $250, which
18 becomes not worth opening the envelope that it arrives in or
19 the e-mail it arrives in.
20 There's a number of concerns. I think the thing
21 we focus on is, one, making sure we have good process
22 training, IT, management support for our staff. And then,
23 two, that we have the right level and mix of staff to make
24 sure that we can move those permits.
25 REPRESENTATIVE ROTHMAN: Thank you, Mr.
99 1 Secretary.
2 One follow-up.
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
4 REPRESENTATIVE ROTHMAN: Would you consider --
5 because I've talked to people who are actually submitting
6 the permit applications. They would be willing to pay a
7 higher fee and maybe some of that goes to the reviewer and
8 some stays in your Department. But, you know, it's, as you
9 know, time is money. You know, perhaps they would be
10 willing -- what they're telling me is that they would be
11 willing to pay a higher fee to get their permit done in an
12 expedited fashion.
13 So I'd appreciate you looking into that.
14 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
15 REPRESENTATIVE ROTHMAN: Thank you for your time
16 today.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
18 REPRESENTATIVE ROTHMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
19 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative Grove.
20 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
21 Good to see you this morning.
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Good to see you.
23 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Question one, I was
24 reading through the RGGI Memorandum of Understanding this
25 weekend. And correct me if I'm wrong, but within that it
100 1 requires a commitment from states to allocate at least 25
2 percent of their allowances for consumer benefit for
3 strategic energy purposes, which includes, quote, mitigation
4 or electric ratepayer impacts.
5 Is that accurate? My interpretation of that was
6 accurate, correct?
7 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
8 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Okay.
9 So we know, one, that there will be an impact to
10 ratepayers moving forward.
11 Now, here's the issue that comes up with where
12 the money goes. Governor Wolf, if I'm not mistaken, has
13 indicated that the Administration will be constrained to
14 spending proceeds in accordance with their State's Air
15 Pollution Control Act, correct?
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
17 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: So basically how we're
18 going to implement it is none of those dollars can go to
19 help offset the increased cost to ratepayers, correct?
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: In a direct way,
21 that is correct. There's an indirect way that that is not
22 true that I'm more than willing to explain.
23 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Okay.
24 If we had time, I would go there.
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Okay.
101 1 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: I'll move on.
2 Two, fines that your Department levies, are they
3 treated as augmentations to the program, your GGO? What is
4 the disposition of fines?
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Fines go directly
6 into the special fund or restricted account they're
7 associated with.
8 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Okay.
9 So if it's fined under air pollution control, it
10 just goes back into that?
11 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: It goes into the
12 Clean Air Fund. If it's a clean water violation, it will go
13 into the Clean Water Fund.
14 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Does that go to
15 programmatic pay or, per se, to the employees to pay for
16 employee complement?
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: It goes into the
18 fund so it's all of the things within the fund. It's not
19 specifically line itemed for any particular thing. We try
20 to be pretty conservative in our assumptions about what
21 those fines and penalty dollars are going to be because it's
22 not frankly something we want any of the funds living off
23 of.
24 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Correct.
25 It's a one-time fund so paying recurring funds
102 1 with one-time revenue creates gaps long term.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
3 And I don't know this is the case today. I know
4 back when I was Admin Deputy a few years ago now, it seemed
5 like every year when we would go through the special fund
6 review, it was always a different program that had some
7 major violation. So one year it might be air, one year it
8 might be waste or water.
9 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Okay.
10 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So it's definitely
11 not reliable funding.
12 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Okay.
13 There's one theme that keeps popping up for the
14 past week including today. It seems like we have these new
15 shiny projects that we spend a lot of time talking about.
16 So today we spent a lot of time talking about RGGI. We
17 talked about, you know, different new proposals, right. And
18 it seems like the base job of agencies are kind of getting
19 pushed to the wayside and creating problems within them.
20 I was very happy to hear you're a fan of the lien
21 process to do it better, more efficient moving forward.
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Absolutely.
23 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: So within that thought
24 process, legislative Budget Finance came out with their
25 audit. I'm sure you're aware of that. It was the Chapter
103 1 102 and Chapter 105 permitting programs. They had
2 conclusions. DEP does not systematically collect and
3 analyze report data to measure the performance of the CCDs
4 or DEP regional offices for all Chapter 102 and Chapter 105
5 permitting programs. To me, if I would see that in a
6 report, I would utilize my lien tool and start doing data
7 measures on that. Has that happened?
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
9 It's one of the things that goes into that
10 backlog management piece as well as the move to electronic
11 permitting. And in particular for 102, which I think is a
12 clear example, whereas we just had the discussion the
13 conservation districts have a piece of that, as we move that
14 into electronic permitting, things that are going on out in
15 those counties are things we'll have more visibility into in
16 terms of permit time frames, permit process, etc.
17 It's definitely a piece of this that we're
18 looking at and my staff knows. I mean, yes, RGGI and other
19 things are absolutely important, but so is the base things
20 that we need to do as an Agency. We're moving all in on
21 visual management. We're moving all in on dashboards and
22 other things to support our employees and our managers and
23 getting the job done.
24 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Good.
25 Because, you know, other things we heard was
104 1 about the Hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund. We also have issues
2 obviously with the Recycling Fund. That was approved in
3 1988. There are still issues going on with that. So, you
4 know, as a government agency that has been around for quite
5 a while -- it's been in existence before your arrival; it
6 will be in existence -- we need to make sure that the
7 agencies themselves are running as efficiently as they
8 possibly can at the lowest cost, bring the best benefit to
9 taxpayers and obviously for cleaning up and protecting the
10 environment.
11 I just think, you know, through what I have heard
12 from agency heads throughout the past week, the focus is on
13 new shiny things rather than that base. And I'd really
14 appreciate the Administration focusing on that moving
15 forward.
16 Thank you.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: So the one thing I
18 would in particular say on that is we're, again, very
19 focused on liens and other things within the Agency. And
20 some of what gets lost in that is, as we proceed down paths
21 where we're simplifying permit processes around stream
22 restoration, around smaller projects, that's an efficiency
23 within that that frees up more time for us to make sure
24 we're able to focus on those more complicated projects, too,
25 so all of it ends up fitting together.
105 1 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Right.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I always say it's
3 not one thing, it's 100 things that we're doing at any given
4 moment to deal with any of these issues. That's exactly the
5 conversation we should be having.
6 I appreciate it.
7 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Thank you.
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Certainly.
9 REPRESENTATIVE GROVE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative
11 Ortitay.
12 REPRESENTATIVE ORTITAY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
13 Mr. Secretary, on page 94 of the document that
14 you provided to the Committee, it lists the waiver funds or
15 the waiver line items there. There's five of them. There's
16 the GGO line item, the Environmental Program Management
17 line, and then the Environmental Protection Operations,
18 Black Fly Control and Research, West Nile Virus, and Zika
19 Virus Control. One of these line items actually has waivers
20 back to 2014, some 2015, 2016, and 2018.
21 I was wondering if you could provide the
22 Committee with the available balance of those waivers and
23 how much of that is actually committed.
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I would have to get
25 that for you but we can do that.
106 1 REPRESENTATIVE ORTITAY: Okay.
2 That's all I have. I'm keeping it brief.
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Okay.
4 REPRESENTATIVE ORTITAY: Thank you.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes, thank you.
6 REPRESENTATIVE ORTITAY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
7 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Representative Vitali.
8 REPRESENTATIVE VITALI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
9 And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for coming here
10 today. You do an excellent job at the DEP, and the
11 Commonwealth is lucky to have you. I see your staff behind
12 you. You all do a great job. I just want to publicly thank
13 you for being patient with me and answering the questions I
14 have.
15 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: They do okay.
16 They're great.
17 REPRESENTATIVE VITALI: They are great.
18 I wanted to kind of focus in on DEP funding and
19 staffing levels in the context of Governor Wolf's Budget
20 Proposal. And while there are a couple of positive things,
21 I want to kind of put it in context and get your comments on
22 them.
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
24 REPRESENTATIVE VITALI: It's important at the
25 outset to note that, you know, we're down 900 positions
107 1 since 2002. So although your 25-personnel increase is
2 welcome, that has to be put into the context of those 900
3 positions down.
4 According to DEP information -- and although
5 you've proposed in this Budget adding 15 positions to the
6 Air Program, it's my understanding that you're down 99
7 positions since 2000. So it's important to put those 15
8 more positions in the context of the 99 positions lost.
9 Now with regard to the Oil and Gas Program, at a
10 recent meeting it was testified by the DEP that you need 49
11 more positions to do things like permitting that was
12 discussed earlier and that the fee package you are proposing
13 would not cover any of these new positions.
14 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Correct.
15 REPRESENTATIVE VITALI: With regard to abandoned
16 wells, there are over 200,000 known unplugged orphan and gas
17 wells. And you've only plugged 23 out of 200,000 in the
18 past three years. I don't see any money in here.
19 Stream protection, you estimated back in 2018
20 that you need 63 more staffers and only two have been added.
21 I don't see money here for that.
22 And it was good that the Governor proposed a $1
23 million increase for ten positions for Chesapeake Bay, but
24 the Federal Government says you need 320 million a year each
25 year until 2026. So while 1 million is good, in the context
108 1 of needing $320 million, it's something to consider.
2 The HSCA Program, you guys -- and it was good
3 that the Governor has proposed this fee. I fully support
4 that. But HSCA is down 46 positions since 2013. That's
5 quite a drop.
6 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
7 REPRESENTATIVE VITALI: I saw an interesting
8 article by former DEP Secretary David Hess that while this
9 year General Fund support for DEP is 174 million, in real
10 dollar terms, real dollar terms, in 1994, General Fund
11 support for DEP was 285 million, so that's 111 million down.
12 You know, I understand there are certain
13 political realities and constraints and they only perhaps
14 might be resolved at the ballot box. But I wanted to put
15 these concerns out to you that, in my view, the real
16 underresourcing of these fine people in doing their job and
17 you, too, the fine job you do, and just sort of perhaps have
18 you comment on that.
19 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
20 And I think again, there's a few things in there,
21 which is, one, what we're working to do is keep our outcome
22 focused. As you mentioned and as Secretary Perry mentioned,
23 when we were doing the oil and gas fee package, in order to
24 get to all of the inspections and achieve some of the
25 permitting time frames, etc., we're down staff. We need
109 1 more. The reality of those oil and gas fees is they keep us
2 flat based on where we're at. So we absolutely have those
3 kinds of issues.
4 There's also -- and I say it's important to keep
5 that outcome focus because I think it's instructive to look
6 at some of those prior years. But it's also not necessarily
7 reflective of totality of workload and not necessarily
8 reflective of the efficiencies in other things that we're
9 working to achieve in these programs, which is why we try to
10 keep it outcome focused.
11 The one piece -- and it's just an absolute
12 clarification I want to make sure -- on the bay, $324
13 million, one, that is a number that came out of our process
14 of developing the watershed implementation plan for Phase 3
15 of the Bay initiative and, two, that isn't an all in dollars
16 amount. So that's not necessarily 324 million state.
17 That's all of the partners, in Federal dollars, State
18 dollars, private dollars, in kind work, etc.
19 REPRESENTATIVE VITALI: Okay.
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: And we're working
21 frankly to bring down that ask by leveraging all of the
22 resources that we have as best we can and as efficiently as
23 we can to get the work done.
24 REPRESENTATIVE VITALI: Thank you.
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
110 1 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: I want to point out,
2 Mr. Secretary, thank you for recognizing it's about the
3 partnership doing that. Because I know the County of York
4 is talking about 20-some dollars as part of that partnership
5 as well as our local municipalities. So I'm glad you
6 recognized the partners that are a part of that.
7 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
8 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: With that, I recognize
9 Chairman Metcalfe of the Environmental Resources & Energy
10 Committee.
11 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: Thank you, Chairman
12 Saylor.
13 Secretary McDonnell.
14 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
15 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: I sent you a lengthy
16 list of questions regarding the Governor's Executive Order
17 to start the process of us joining RGGI. And the response
18 that I received ignored most of the questions and it really
19 lacked any detailed information that should be available for
20 anybody that's had a thoughtful process to even consider
21 giving input to an Executive Order like we saw the Governor
22 issue.
23 If one of my constituents -- if I would have
24 offered one of my constituents a letter that I received back
25 from you in answer to my many questions that were legitimate
111 1 questions regarding RGGI and the impact of that on
2 Pennsylvania, if I would have showed -- given that to a
3 constituent, offered that to a constituent, they would have
4 thought that I was totally dodging all of the answers that I
5 should have been giving them. And I believe that
6 constituent would have felt very insulted by receiving a
7 reply such as that. And frankly, if I would have given such
8 a reply, I would have been embarrassed to even put my name
9 on it.
10 So with that said, the RGGI issue that we've been
11 talking about a good bit and that you've been before my
12 committee on the issue, we had a hearing recently on the
13 issue that we heard of many of the folks that Representative
14 Struzzi referenced that are out there working in some of
15 these facilities that are going to have their livelihoods
16 destroyed by RGGI. One of the major concerns has been the
17 idea of leakage.
18 And for people that aren't in the game, that's a
19 loss of ultimately the energy production in those states as
20 a result of trying to meet the different criteria that had
21 been set, which ultimately means jobs move out of state.
22 Now, Pennsylvania from 2005 to '18, as was
23 mentioned earlier, we cut our carbon emissions by 41 percent
24 at least. RGGI states reduced their carbon intensity for
25 their electricity production by 13.3 percent from '05 to
112 1 '16, whereas Pennsylvania reduced our carbon intensity from
2 electricity generation from 16.7 percent over -- well, we
3 reduced it by 16.7 percent over the same period of time,
4 which meant that we were either -- we were 25 percent more
5 effective at reducing the carbon intensity than those RGGI
6 states.
7 In addition, we're the second largest net energy
8 producer, which we're exporting energy, where the RGGI
9 states who used to actually produce more of their own
10 electricity are reducing -- or producing less electricity
11 now for what they're consuming and having to rely on other
12 states to import and to provide that for them, Pennsylvania,
13 of course, being one of those.
14 So with the major concern about RGGI being
15 leakage, one of the major concerns, and the jobs that we'll
16 see lost as a result of that because energy production will
17 move to other states like West Virginia and Ohio, why would
18 the Administration even have a thought about joining RGGI
19 when we're reducing our carbon emissions without it, clearly
20 better than RGGI states and it will ultimately harm our
21 economy in Pennsylvania and harm our consumers in
22 Pennsylvania, at the same time as hurting energy development
23 industry, which we've been leading the nation on?
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: First, I would love
25 to talk to you more in one of our quarterlies or whatever
113 1 about the reaction to the letter and specific concerns
2 there.
3 But in terms of the specifics of that question,
4 one, we are modeling the leakage issue as part of the
5 modeling that we are doing under RGGI. But as I said, we're
6 also seeing build-out of other forms of generations in some
7 of these other states. So we are starting to see some of
8 those flows happen.
9 The other thing is in terms of the overall
10 number. And again, I think talking about some of the
11 specific sources of some of that information, I know the
12 numbers we've seen and talked about is a 13 percent
13 reduction in our carbon emissions from, I think, 2005 levels
14 and RGGI states achieving a 47 percent reduction over that
15 same time period with no impact on rates, which, as I
16 mentioned earlier, has a lot to do with not just the
17 allowance price but how you invest those revenues to support
18 energy efficiency, renewable energy, and greenhouse gas
19 abatement within your jurisdiction.
20 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: So as we've looked at
21 the RGGI issue and had some of the hearings that we've held
22 in the past on some of these issues, a couple of groups that
23 came before my committee were Penn Environment and the
24 Sierra Club. And during the questioning of those groups,
25 they are for eliminating fossil fuel use altogether.
114 1 So what types of communications have you had or
2 your Department had with those types of groups that want to
3 eliminate all fossil fuel use?
4 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: I mean, we've
5 talked to environmental groups. I'm not sure the specific
6 environmental groups that may have been in with other staff
7 so I can't speak to that. But we've also met with, as I
8 said, generators and members of the industry as well. And I
9 think, you know, it's fair to say it's certainly not the
10 Governor's position to eliminate fossil fuel use and one of
11 the things that I think is a feature and not a flaw of RGGI
12 is doing this incrementally. So going through a process
13 where you're reducing it not all overnight but that you are
14 looking at 3 percent reductions year over year.
15 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: So the Governor's
16 position is not to eliminate the use of fossil fuel but it's
17 his position to eliminate the use of coal, which RGGI
18 ultimately would do?
19 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: The position of the
20 Governor's Office is to use market forces to address
21 greenhouse gas emission s. And there are --
22 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: So it's a government
23 program -- how is it market forces?
24 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: By placing a price
25 on the carbon.
115 1 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: But -- which is a tax.
2 Like we talked about fees and taxes earlier. This will
3 place a tax on carbon that people don't have to pay right
4 now, which they would have to pay if you were successful in
5 advancing RGGI, which ultimately to advance that tax and fee
6 you need the Legislature's approval.
7 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: This is a cap and
8 investment program that is similar to other programs that we
9 have done under the Air Pollution Control Act. That's why
10 we're exercising the authority under our regulatory
11 authority.
12 Now, that said, as I said, this is an incremental
13 change over time. It is not flipping a switch and turning
14 all of this off. And as I said --
15 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: So is it the Governor's
16 position to eliminate the use of coal?
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Pardon?
18 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: Is it the Governor's
19 position to eliminate the use of coal?
20 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: No. No.
21 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Mr. Secretary, we're
22 going to move on.
23 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Mr. Chairman, I
24 appreciate that.
25 REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: Thank you, Mr.
116 1 Chairman.
2 Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
3 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: With that, I call on
4 Representative Bradford.
5 MINORITY CHAIRMAN BRADFORD: Thank you, Mr.
6 Chairman.
7 Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
8 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Sure.
9 MINORITY CHAIRMAN BRADFORD: With that, I think
10 it might be appropriate to bring a little bit of clarity and
11 progress to how we've gotten to the place we are on climate
12 and RGGI in particular.
13 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Okay.
14 MINORITY CHAIRMAN BRADFORD: I happened to go
15 back and look just six years ago and looked at what the then
16 DEP Secretary when asked about climate change said. I have
17 not read any specific studies that would lead me to conclude
18 that there are any adverse impacts to human beings, animals,
19 or plant life at this small level of climate change. And
20 that was then Secretary Abruzzo.
21 Is that the position of this Administration?
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: No.
23 I mean, we've seen, I think, you know, some of
24 the previous questions went to cost. We've seen costs at
25 our Department of Transportation for the cost of dealing
117 1 with flood concerns like the flooding issues that came up
2 earlier.
3 We're working with our Department of Health on
4 tick surveillance and we're seeing expansion of these
5 seasons. We have flat funding for West Nile Virus, Zika
6 Virus, Black Fly within this. And we see expansion of the
7 periods of time those species are propagating.
8 We see impacts within the agricultural community
9 where they were not able to get hay off the fields during a
10 particular rainy season, couldn't get cover crops on.
11 That's both an economic impact for those farmers as well as
12 a water quality impact.
13 So we are absolutely seeing and paying for this
14 right now.
15 MINORITY CHAIRMAN BRADFORD: Right.
16 And that transition -- and I think Chairman
17 Metcalfe actually talked about how we've decreased our
18 carbon emissions here in Pennsylvania in no small part
19 actually from frankly market-based forces moving from a
20 transition from use of a lot of coal to abundant natural
21 gas.
22 Is that a fair assessment of what's driving a lot
23 of the numbers, it has nothing to do with taxes or the RGGI
24 scheme that exists in Pennsylvania?
25 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: No.
118 1 We've seen the natural gas build-out and that's
2 come predominantly at the expense of coal generation within
3 the state. So it's within PJM, you follow what the power
4 price is and if you're not clear, you're not clear.
5 MINORITY CHAIRMAN BRADFORD: And that's why I
6 think, you know, hyperbolic rhetoric about a tax being
7 imposed and outlawing coal, I mean, the simple reality is
8 market forces have been driving this for quite some time.
9 I would also move on to just point out you
10 mentioned the cost and such. The gentleman from Lycoming
11 talked about stream bank erosion and it's a very real
12 concern. And it is probably in some ways made worse by the
13 challenges of climate change.
14 But the gentleman rightfully points out -- and I
15 think I'm paraphrasing. But he says if you ignore a problem
16 it will go away is the theory in government sometimes and
17 we're going to -- we need to stop studying and start fixing.
18 I realize that there are climate deniers out
19 there who don't believe we have a challenge with climate
20 change and want to put our heads in the sand.
21 I think our current situations in this world, and
22 frankly in this Commonwealth, prove that not to be true. I
23 want to encourage and thank the Governor for continuing to
24 pursue RGGI. It seems to be a possible way to move this
25 forward again based on a market-based approach that will put
119 1 Pennsylvania in a sustainable energy future.
2 Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
3 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: No. Thank you.
4 And the one last thing I would say on that and it
5 goes broadly to something I said earlier, which is it's a
6 fault within RGGI or any other context. It's a false choice
7 to say this is economy versus environment. RGGI is
8 something that could be an economic driver for any number of
9 things that we do as a Commonwealth. And that is an
10 important factor within this.
11 MINORITY CHAIRMAN BRADFORD: You know, I think
12 that -- and I don't want to reopen but I just think that's
13 such an important thing. One of the things I think we
14 should be doing is frankly laying the groundwork for a
15 continued transition to a clean energy future. RGGI
16 obviously opens that opportunity.
17 And I think if we were open-minded as a
18 Legislature, we could work on that, realizing that gas has
19 moved that ball along quite far away but there is still much
20 we must do.
21 Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
22 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
23 MINORITY CHAIRMAN BRADFORD: Thank you, Mr.
24 Chairman.
25 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Mr. Secretary, I guess
120 1 I get to wrap it up.
2 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Yes.
3 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: One of the things that
4 I've had a concern with -- and you and I talked about it
5 over the years -- has been really your Agency has been
6 replacing PennDOT as the problem agency from the point of
7 people -- constituents really, whether homeowners, business
8 owners, and that's concerning to me.
9 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Um-hmm.
10 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: You have a great
11 mission. I mean, you've probably heard me say this before,
12 maybe even last year at the hearings, I -- 20 years before
13 he was born, I was out cleaning up streams, recycling
14 newspapers, and things like that between the Boy Scouts. We
15 had a York County Environmental Council with Dallastown High
16 School, Mr. Stauffer, cleaning up streams.
17 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: That's great.
18 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: I mean, before most
19 people knew what the word environment was, we were already
20 doing it, a lot of us.
21 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Great.
22 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: And I think that the
23 concern I have is that I'm right on the Maryland border.
24 Maryland doesn't have the same environmental problems with
25 their agency. They actually have surpassed Pennsylvania
121 1 with their permitting process.
2 And people in my area are saying we might as well
3 move our businesses to Maryland because we can build a
4 warehouse, we can build homes faster. Now, there's some
5 other detriments, higher taxes in Maryland. But the bottom
6 line comes to that's a real concern I have and I care about
7 because our state employees are great employees, very
8 dedicated.
9 But that comes down to the fact that we have to
10 understand that we answer to the taxpayers of Pennsylvania.
11 And I think it's important that your employees understand
12 their relationship. It isn't always the answer you give
13 somebody that you're agreeing with them, but it's how you
14 give that answer. And I think that's something that some of
15 your employees at DEP have to learn.
16 So the other thing I would say to you is we
17 talked about the Recycling Fund. We have used the Recycling
18 Fund for a $5 million loan program for Food Banks, which I
19 think is absurd using money for that kind of a program. Why
20 not use those excess funds we have in recycling to do the
21 hazardous site cleanup. Those are dollars that are there
22 laying that we can use without increasing garbage fees on
23 Pennsylvania taxpayers. Everybody knows if we increase the
24 tipping fee tomorrow, garbage rates are going up in
25 Pennsylvania to whoever.
122 1 You know, the other thing I point out is I've got
2 to stand up for the farmers of this Commonwealth because it
3 seems like every time there's a problem with air pollution,
4 people want to put the blame on farmers. The truth of the
5 matter is farmers have done far more for this Commonwealth
6 in cleaning up the environment than any other organization
7 has.
8 You don't see today the runoff from farms that
9 you had years ago. You see almost none. We see farmers
10 hardly ever fertilize anymore. They do the rotating the
11 crops. But yet when it comes to the Chesapeake Bay, we tend
12 to put the blame on the farmers of Pennsylvania.
13 In my discussions with Former Secretary Hanger
14 and Secretary McGinty, both agreed with me that the biggest
15 problem out there is not the farmers. It's the groups who
16 are fertilizing our lawns. Every one of us in this room and
17 everybody watching on TV will be getting ten mailers in the
18 next few weeks to fertilize our lawns eight times between
19 now and the end of summer. So when you're putting that many
20 chemicals out there, nitrates and everything else, where do
21 you think it's going? Eight times and farmers aren't even
22 fertilizing anymore.
23 Yet we have not dealt with that problem. Instead
24 we point our fingers at farmers and want to make higher fees
25 on them for different water withdrawals and everything else.
123 1 It's about time we address the real problem that's there.
2 Now, what the solution is, I don't know, whether
3 we put a fee or require testing, require people who do
4 sludge to attest before they apply and they have to attest
5 after they apply. Maybe it's time that some of these
6 organizations who run these chemical companies have to do
7 the same thing on lawns because this is just ridiculous that
8 we're sitting there blaming farmers for a problem that we
9 acknowledged and some people like to ignore.
10 The other thing is I've got to be honest. I
11 laughed at Governor Hogan, although I admired him in some
12 ways, when he wanted to sue the State of Pennsylvania. You
13 know, Governor Hogan, how about if I cut the power lines off
14 to you and your garbage that don't get to come to
15 Pennsylvania.
16 I love New York and New Jersey but they love to
17 ship their garbage and they love to take our power but we
18 are the evil state. I mean, we're paying 50 percent. I
19 mean, this is something the people need to know publicly.
20 We're paying 50 percent of New York State's assessment for
21 the Susquehanna River Commission. Why are we paying New
22 York -- 50 percent of their assessment for cleaning up that
23 river? Who would have signed that agreement? I don't care
24 Republican or Democrat, it doesn't matter. That's
25 outrageous. We're paying New York State's funds out of our
124 1 own taxpayer dollars.
2 I'm not blaming you. This has been going on long
3 before you came as Secretary. But it's something that I
4 think we have to be more aware of. There is no doubt in my
5 mind there isn't a state in this nation who has done a
6 better job of recycling. In fact, I don't think there's a
7 state that matches Pennsylvania in recycling in the country,
8 from the last survey I've seen, cleaning up our environment.
9 We have done a great job. Your Department and
10 others, your partners, have done a great job in cleaning up
11 the environment of Pennsylvania. We have a ways to go. We
12 all acknowledge that but so do a lot of other states. But
13 we can't do it if we're going to simply put blame on people
14 without coming up with real solutions.
15 And I would say to some of the other Governors
16 across this country that they need to do as good a job as
17 Pennsylvania has done in cleaning up environments. That
18 doesn't mean we need to stop. It doesn't mean we need to
19 progress less. It just means that I don't think sometimes
20 the work that we've done always gets the credit. I think
21 Chairman Metcalfe pointed out what we've already done here
22 in Pennsylvania.
23 Yes, we're building more power plants with
24 natural gas, which has cut our CO2 but it also has some CO2
25 in it. But the bottom line is if we don't build those new
125 1 power plants, New York and them aren't going to be
2 attracting jobs they were doing, which would be perfectly
3 fine with me to cut the power off to their states especially
4 since the power lines are coming through my district.
5 But in the end, I guess my thing to you is I
6 think your Department needs to do a better PR job of how
7 good and how successful Pennsylvania has been, not just
8 noting the problems that we have in Pennsylvania, because
9 every state has those.
10 I would suggest to the Governor of Maryland that
11 maybe he needs to look internally at what his state is not
12 doing to do those kind of things.
13 With that, Mr. Secretary, I'll get off my soapbox
14 today of bragging about our Commonwealth because I think our
15 Commonwealth has done quite an amazing job.
16 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: The one thing I
17 would be remiss if I didn't say is -- really two things.
18 One, on the Bay initiative, I'll just say the farmers have
19 been an amazing partner for us within that. And Secretary
20 Redding always says, the Bay effort is not just about water
21 quality, it's about -- and it's not just about what's a farm
22 like in 2025. It's about what a farm is like in 2050 and us
23 thinking about that in those terms. They have been
24 fantastic partners.
25 There's so much good work going on in Lancaster
126 1 County in particular right now with the Lancaster Clean
2 Water Partners. So much work going on in York County with
3 our county partners there.
4 On the waste issue in particular, I'll just say
5 we're looking at Act 101 and we're looking at recycling. We
6 moved in the single stream. It's created contamination
7 issues that have created some market issues. It's a
8 struggle. We're looking now at Act 101 as to, how do we
9 address that but in part also how do we address food waste
10 and organic waste issues?
11 We have processes in place and companies that
12 want to come in and take consumer waste from grocery stores
13 and other places. And it's challenging to get through some
14 of the process set up by the law and the regs through that.
15 So we're really, really taking a hard look at the
16 kinds of things that we needed to do to be supportive of
17 certain waste streams as a commodity particularly within the
18 organic space and not create additional roadblocks to
19 getting more of that out of the landfills.
20 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: And I appreciate that.
21 I just don't think that we should be increasing
22 garbage fees on people right now when we have the funds in
23 the Recycling Fund to take care of that. I think the
24 Hazardous Site Cleanup Fund is very important and critical
25 that we continue that for Pennsylvania's economy but I
127 1 prefer not to put higher fees on individuals or taxes until
2 it's really necessary, especially when we have the funds
3 sitting there.
4 Thank you very much for coming today.
5 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you.
6 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: I appreciate you
7 coming and testifying because I know you're suffering
8 through somewhat of what I have been with the flu.
9 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you so much.
10 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: Thank you.
11 SECRETARY PATRICK McDONNELL: Thank you all.
12 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN SAYLOR: The Committee will
13 reconvene today at 1:15 for the Department of Conservation &
14 Natural Resources.
15 (Whereupon, the hearing concluded.)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
128 1 I hereby certify that the proceedings and
2 evidence are contained fully and accurately in the notes
3 taken by me on the within proceedings and that this is a
4 correct transcript of the same.
5
6
7
8 Jean M. Davis 9 Notary Public
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
129