JAC Agency Hearings JAC Index 01-11-15am1 Monday January 11, 2016 Agenda: AM 020 – Department of Environmental Quality 220 – Environmental Quality Council 014 – Miner’s Hospital Agenda: PM 029 – Water Development commission 037 – State Engineer ER= Exception Request 1/11/2016 9:04:39 AM Chairman for the day is Co-chairman Ross Roll Call by Don Richards: Quorum established. 1/11/2016 9:06:04 AM 020- Department of environmental Quality Parfitt: Introductions of Director Todd Parfitt, Deputy Director of AML Funds: Alan Edwards, Jim Uzzell, Kevin Frederick, Nancy Vehr, Kyle Wendland, Luke Esch, Two handouts given by the agency. 020-109 and 020-110 1/11/2016 9:08:06 AM Parfitt: Budget page 7 – Department Priorities. Administration did not have a priority Page 13 – Administration – 13 FTE’s Page 16 – Second part of administration – Std. budget for IT approved by Governor. Exception 1 for 200 series IT, 240 and 242 series are zero based budgeted. Software licenses and computer equipment 1.3 M GF. Governor approval out of rainy day account, not GF. Condition that funds are restricted so not expended for any other purpose 1/11/2016 9:12:08 AM Greear: Laptops, etc. Breakdown of licensing. Parfitt: Software 20%. Greear: Other agencies looking at replacing as needed. Is this a replacement plan or as needed? Parfitt: This is a replacement plan. After 4th year, replacement. Have a laptop or a desktop, not both. Ross: Can you delay? Parfitt: Replacement schedule, difficulty with delay is that software does not match up with functionality. To the extent we can delay, without an impediment to the work, we can look at that. Burkhart: current biennium budgeted amount? Parfitt: Can get you that information. Hibbard: $757,424 was the amount zeroed out. Hibbard: unit 0102 Uzzell: With this biennium, we have combined all of them into the 0102 budget. In the previous biennium, there were other expenditures in other areas of the budget. 1/11/2016 9:16:29 AM Parfitt: 1.13M for ongoing maintenance for IT systems. Governor approval as submitted. Paperless initiative: 2014 session, directed by legislature to go completely paperless. Cost estimate of those projects. Original over 60 M over 20 years. We scaled back. Reported 12 M for 4 to 5 years to the management council. Took out the legacy piece of that and ended up with 5 M for 3 to 4 years. Received funding for the first year. Next round of projects were for 4.7M. This request reduces the 4.7 down to 1.2 M. One project is in solid and hazardous waste department, replacing 15 year old system. Greear: Legacy is the old stuff. Do you slowly bring some of the old stuff when new permits are requested? Parfitt: To the extent that it makes sense, we are doing that. Nicholas: Paperless initiative for past 10 years? Refresh. Parfitt: Began in 2007, agency wide, paperless IT initiative. At the time systems could not talk to each other. Gave progress to date. Example of improvements in terms of efficiency – Lander field office – To open larger documents, staff had to go to the Safeway parking lot to do so. The 4 minutes time to open document was reduced to 4 seconds. Range of 10 M since the 2007 time frame. Nicholas: Has it worked well for you for the services to go over to ETS? Parfitt: Help desk services are very good, timely. Move to new building this fall, ETs was instrumental in helping. With any new organization, there are glitches. We have identified areas and discussed with the CIO. Providing services needed, we go to ETS with business cases, conversation. Most cases we are contracting out those services. For the most part, fairly successful. Nicholas: What are you contracting out? By transferring positions out, you still pay for the services. Are you getting the bang for your buck? Parfitt: deferred to Uzzell. Uzzell: Positions that went to ETs, budget went also. Bang for buck, yes. We can ask many experts at ETS for information. Do we get our same 4 FTE’s of service back, I would say yes. I made a mistake about the number from Mr. Hibbard. His number is correct. 1/11/2016 9:29:46 AM Parfitt: page 25 Air Quality. Exception requests. Air Quality Funding replacement. Historical information. AML Federal Helium Bill provided additional funding for the state. Anticipated 21 M of prior balance funds, legislature discretion on how to use. Decision to fund 3 M with AML funds. We were not going to receive funding until after first year of biennium so needed carryover funding. 1.8M from solid waste division to air quality with understanding of replacement of funds. 1.3 M shifted in supplemental. 500,000 was one time expenditures so needed 1.3 M instead of 1.8 M. It is necessary for ongoing monitoring of air quality, funding for exceptional events, for equipment calibration and 2 positions being funded with federal funds. Harshman: 1.3 M is the payback that was used from solid waste? Parfitt: yes. Harshman: How long have we made for this out of AML funds? Parfitt: Probably 6. 8 years Connolly: question Parfitt: 241 M has two buckets 165.4 in prior balance at discretion of legislature with preference given to impacts from mineral development. 76.5M is in normal reclamation type funds, has different criteria and procedures. New coal reclamation, new means newly identified which meets criteria. Process is those are recommended by governor to state loans board Connolly: Two additional positions requested in ER request. Vacancy report. Parfitt: Existing positions. Asking for change in funding source, not new positions. Vacancy report Connolly: 7005-6 wording Uzzell: Separate unit. Units that start with 7 are associated with NRC. I do not know what your vacancy report shows. Authorized last session. Harshman: 1.3M has been prior balance funds? Parfitt: yes Harshman: Reclamation dollars – Have we ever had dollars left over that SLIB could grant to community development? Parfitt: There have been some public projects. Harshman: Examples Parfitt: I think it has been 2006 since we did any of those projects. We addressed remaining coal reclamation at the minimum of 130M per year. Get back to you. Edwards: Public facilities funded prior to the 2006 amendment. Act made clear that all funds must first be used for reclamation prior to other uses. Harshman: High school or hospital built. Edwards: Water lines, sewer lines, Sweetwater hospital. Defined categories under rules Harshman: 76 M – That will all be spoken for in reclamation, high priority needs, none left over? Parfitt: Yes Edwards: Since the 2006 amendment, all dollars have been spent on reclamation projects. Greear: 76 M. At some point in the future we may use those funds for other projects? Parfitt: Correct Ross: Walk through Greear: Employee count for this unit. 73 in base budget. 75 listed. Two federally funded? Parfitt: Two positions: one from industrial siting. Other from water quality position. Greear: Should that be an exception request on that transfer? Ross: With what authority did you transfer? Uzzell: During the biennium with a B-11, reduction in those budget areas. Second position on page 321 – federally funded. 124000 reduction in GF, offset by other funds. Greear: Permanent transfer. Should it be done in the budget? Agar: Ordinarily transfers should be followed with an ER in the budget. Greear: Can do that in mark up Agar: The change has been completed by the agency. WE had several instances of agencies moving funding between divisions for positions. Ross: In the standard budget now? Agar: Correct Greear: If we approve it, it is in there now? Agar: Correct 1/11/2016 9:49:16 AM Parfitt: Clean power plan. EPA rules, September 6, 2016 deadline for submittal of two yr. extension to develop plan, ongoing litigation. 1 ½ FTE time used. Additional appropriation of title 5 fees. Facilities associated with Title 5 fees are covered by plan. 300,000 GF request to keep pace with increased amount of work passed down to us by EPA through the clean air act. Stubson: Burn rate of title 5 funds Parfitt: Background of Title 5 fees. Fees charged at rate of 34.50 per ton of each pollutant. 138,000 facilities subjected to title 5 permitting and fee structure. Wyoming has lowest fee per ton. Air quality division runs lean operation. Budgeted amount has been less than collected amount. Margin has been narrowing. Fee does not need to be raised, have enough in the reserve to cover costs requested. Stubson: What happens to that gap? Parfitt: They stay within the Title 5 account. We have had to raise fees in the past. Last change in 2012. Tried to stay consistent with fees. Annual collection declines as companies put more emission controls on. Stubson: Fund balance? Parfitt: 1.5 M Greear: Does DEQ set fees? Parfitt: Yes. If we were to change the fees, we would have discussion here with the legislature. Greear: Ongoing expense to be addressed? Parfitt: yes Greear: Should we have increased cost be self paying, instead of dipping into the GF. Parfitt: Other facilities covered by Title 5. State implementation plans. Connolly: Any regulation that says we can’t use those title 5 monies for the entire ER request? Where did the 50/50 split come from? Parfitt: not at our discretion to use Title 5 for other purposes. Connolly: Any statute or regulation that calls for 50/50 split or accurate reflection? Parfitt: Division does analysis of expenditure of funds, estimate of 50/50 Harshman: Narrative, page 26 and table on page 27. Question on numbers in narrative an in table. Parfitt: $ 350,000 is what we anticipate we need. $102,000 was already appropriated. We need authority to spend additional funds. Perkins: Question Parfitt: For contract work, not additional staff Perkins: Circuit court, similar action, Impact. Parfitt: Does not affect the request. Do not know outcome of legal action. If we do not submit something on September x, 2016, we would get a federal implementation plan and non one wants that. If a stay were granted, it changes expenditures but we need them in place. Perkins: Would you have ability to stop expenditure or effort if a stay was granted? Parfitt: if that was the construct of the language. Perkins: If stay is not granted, the litigation is worthless. We will see what happens. Parfitt: Correct. Happened with mercury ruling. Burns: If federal govt. does not approve state plan, does fed. Govt. plan go into effect? Parfitt: Correct, regional office Nicholas: How far along on the plan? Who is working on it? Purpose of carrying person on after plan is prepared. Parfitt: We will not submit plan in September of 2016. Public outreach, conversation with other states. First submittal is to get 2 year extension. Biennial request. We have a team working on this with public commission and governor’s office. Same people on this team are also responsible for timely permits for other media. 1/11/2016 10:09:41 AM Parfitt: Page 27 records and data management position. Currently using temporary services and support specialist. Would eliminate temporary services if position authorized and return support specialist. Using temporary services is difficult, because of training and retraining. 2nd part is the industrial siting position moving to air quality and water quality position has source difference. % given for federal and GF. $124,000 decrease in GF. Greear: Vacancies within the agency for extended periods of time. If we extend or authorize one more FTE, what one of these other positions can go so we have a net zero effect? Parfitt: Agency head count has been steady. Reduced a few positions in 2012. Impact of frozen positions. Carbon sequestration bonding. Request from EPA in spring for position. We are doing some restructuring and have centralized bonding positions. We may not need that position but can’t tell you that at this time. Greear: ? Parfitt: We went through process requested by Governor. 8 frozen positions at this time. We may find we have to fill a frozen position but would offer up a different position to fill that. 54,000 per month savings for frozen positions, GF savings less. Greear: Report – 4052 position vacant for 16 months. Can we switch that over for you this biennium? Harshman: 15 of the 32 vacancies have been open for a year or more. Parfitt: Shift frozen position and ask for it in next biennium to backfill, if needed. Greear: one of 8 positions. Could we shift it? Parfitt: We do not need position in the short term. I do not know what the short term will look like. We could do that, would have to evaluate if we would come back at later date to reevaluate. Greear: Position frozen now is to help in short term. When we roll over in new biennium, frozen carried over? Parfitt: I do not know if that will carryover. I understand your concept, can work with that. Pull other positions or ask for position back in the supplemental. Stubson: Temporary help being used now? Parfitt: Temporary service position and administrative position not being filled. Stubson: Temp being paid out of 900 series. Is there a corresponding reduction in the 900 series? Parfitt: I would think so., would have to get back to you with the amount. 1/11/2016 10:24:00 AM Parfitt: page 36 Water quality division 3 ER requests 1. Pavilion study Nicholas: go back to air quality, update Parfitt: Regional haze – submitted state implementation plan, EPA partially approved the plan. Ongoing litigation. Sublette county aka upper green river basin designated non containment in 2012. Good progress .Ozone reduction strategy. Standard is changing. Snow pack is a variable. Notified by EPA that we are achieving standard. Monitoring network over other areas of state. Burns: Snow pack variable, helps or hinders? Parfitt: snow pack and angel of son intensifies. 1/11/2016 10:29:30 AM Break 1/11/2016 10:39:18 AM Parfitt: additional water quality sampling at Pavillion. Will coordinate with Oil and Gas Commission when ready to finalize report. $300,000, one time funds. USGS Monitoring Contract, $100,000 from WYPDES program, as authorized. Lab ICP, Authorization to spend $150,000 from WYPDES program. Nicholas: Why $300,000 for Pavillion monitoring? Parfitt: Out of state consultant, performed level I study. Also includes some field work outside the report. $2M currently spent by all agencies connected with Pavillion project. Perkins: Additional $$ from Oil and Gas Commission? Parfitt: $300,000 for only those duties being performed by DEQ. Page 44, land quality division. Standard budget approved by governor Exception request, funding shift, $330,000 more general fund to support non-coal mine program to meet statutory requirements. Page 50, industrial siting. Governor approval of standard budget. One position shifted to another division. Page 56, Solid Waste. Standard budget approved by governor. Exception request, Orphan Site Program, 21 sites, $10M. Requesting $1.8M Harshman: UST program update? Parfitt: Wrapping up program, shift funds for landfill remediation. Need funds until 2035 to pay for all landfill remediation. Connolly: any more orphan sites? Parfitt: sure there are more Old dry cleaning facility, not oil wells. Page 62, Uranium Mining and Milling. Exception request Uranium NRC Agreement, $746,736 for support costs of NRC program Greear: 3 positions, biennium costs? Parfitt: Will get back with those costs. Charges to industry $3.2M annually. $1.6M from DEQ. Perkins: 4 year standup costs? Parfitt: $4.2M Page 66, landfills. No $$. Cleanup. Page 71, abandoned mine reclamation. Cease and transfer program. $20.5M. Remaining funds of $6.5M. Need for $17M in cease and transfer program. $22M available in landfill remediation account. Request to extend AML appropriation, letter to 2 co-chairs. Richards: $10M to UW, will be spent from AML funds. $165.4M pays 6 and 7 installments in federal transportation funds. $50M, normal installment. Harshman: Reclamation, same protocol for all monies? Use of $76M? Parfitt: conversations with OSM, made funds available to state thru normal process. Reimbursement process. $76M follow same protocol of a certified state. First expend funds on new coal, then old coal. After $176M, following $$ could be used for other items. Not a party to the current transportation bill and interpretations of $$ thru OSM. Consistent with past actions. Could tie funds up for an uncertain time if challenge process. Richards: Issues with process and where funds can be used. OSM ruling was in 2007 on different language. Harshman: Shovel ready projects? Edwards: State has always been in compliance with SNAFRA. Helium bill got cap raised on AML payments. Prior balance payments of $186.4M available for grants. No provision for payback or separate payment. Funds requested thru grant application for reclamation should be approved. Ross: how quick application process and money received? Edwards: Approved in 60 days or less. Harshman: provide list of projects please. Connolly: funds and availability? Edwards: Funds currently available, just submit grant application. Funds should be available July 1. No time limits on spending of reclamation funds. Wasserburger: Bankrupt coal mine companies. How reclaim mines in the future? Parfitt: Work with self bonding companies that allow mines to operate and perform reclamation. Secure bond with state after restructuring after bankruptcy. Edwards: $172M currently identified projects, but anticipate more. FY2019-2020 will also have additional funds being received. Harshman: Bitter Creek issue in House of Representatives. Parfitt: Not eligible for AML funds. Edwards: $165.4M available to legislature, priority for energy impacts. Must follow guidelines for mineral impacts. Parfitt: In context of use of funds, lots of interest in how funds will be used. Need strong tie to mineral impacts. Stubson: provide spreadsheet of flow of funds projected over next several biennium. 1/11/2016 12:08:20 PM Lunch break.