. South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources Protecting South Dakota's Tomor. row .•. Today DENR FY 2016 BUDGET REQUEST presented to the JOINT APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE February 18, 2015
DENR Programs Secretary Division of Environmental Division of Financial and Services (DES) Technical &sistance (DFT A) DENR Budget Brief - page 5 DENR Budget Brief - page 4 Air Quality Drinking Water Geological Sun·ey Feedlot Permit Groanchn1ter Quality ater and " ' " ' aste Watenbed Protection Funding l\.6nerals and Mining Surface Water Quality D ENR Ad ministratin Services Facilities l\llanage,ment F~cal . :Management Information Se~ic:es Water Rights Waste Management Legal Senioes BOARDS A1'1D COl\lli\USSI ONS Board of Board of BoaJ'dof State Board of Small Petroleum .. . , ·; vater " iater &. l\-fi.nern.ls and E meJ ·aencv Operntor Business Release 1'.fanagement Natural Emironm . ent Resporue Ce . rti:fication Clean Afr Compensation Re.sou.rc ,es Co1:runis~i on Advisory Boal'd P:me ; J - \Vate:r U, e - Sta<t e 1 .Vater Plan - Air Qua i!y - Air Qua ity - Re leaee - Chem ic • rl)i ate1 and Appropri ation - Asb-i!Sto; Sn :,;ill Bu.s ines; Compe nsation - Fin ancial lJ/::i;tenra.ter Reporting - \V ate:r Qua lify Assi etmc e fo r - Ha.zan!oue Om lb u d! ;i!!'.iJ!ll& Oper at or - Communi ty R.egula.ti om \'" ater & Solid \V a;te As .:iis bJ1ce Certification Right to Kno w - Dri~king \Varte Project:; - Mi.nmg ,:v ater - Oil a:nd Gas - Solid \V a.ate 2
Review of FY 2014 End of Year Budget Status 1. DENR's Budget • Excluding its informational budgets, 74% ofDE NR's budget is personnel services;. 260/o is operating; DENR utilized 9·1 o/o ofits total budget authority • DENR utilized 98% of its FTE allocation • DENR utilized 10 0% ofits general funds • No transfers between personal services and operating ·wer e needed 2. Informational Budgets • Regulated Substance Response F,md Create,d by d1e 19 88 Legisla tu re to deal ,;1,, , :i tl1 en vironmental cleanups a .. b .. Ut i li zed $262,747 last year on 3 site :,, c. FY 2014 e nd -o f- year b al a;n ce - $4.74 nulh oo. d. Includes Sl, 99 0,000 transfer to LUST Trust sub ac count es ta blished by SDCL 34A -1 2-3 .1 to pro vi de EPA-mandated re im bursement fo r cleanup of 42 pet ro leum release si t.e s. e. Future liabilities to th e Fund • En vi ron.me n ta l cleanups - about 200 to 250 spi ll s per year • EPA Brolun Ivfin e Superfu nd site - state must provide 10% match for th e projec te d $97 million EPA Superfund cleanu p; the state is th en 100% liable for long-term 1,, vater treat men t costs after EPA leaves • Subacc ou nt - cleanup ofpet:roleum release sit es eligible for LUST Trust Environment.al Livestock Cleanup Fund • a. Created by die 1998 Legisla tu re to act as a safety net fo r environ.mental livestock cleanup s; th e Legislature capped the fund at $2 111.i.ll ion b. Uti li zed $0 last year c. FY 2014 e nd -o f- year ba] an ce - $1.25 million d. Future li abdities to th e Fund • S af e ty net fo r agricu lt ural li vestock operations • Potential bankruptcies pose largest risks • Petroleum Relea se Compensation Fund a. Created by the 1988 Legisla tu re to financially assist tank owners with th e cl e: mup cost of petroleum releases and to meet the federal fi nancial responsibility requirements for re gu lated un derground tank owners b. Uti li zed $720,591 of the informational bud gett o pay 210 claims at 11 1 site s; includes rem oi,.- a1 of 121 abandoned u nde rground petroleum storage tanks c. FY 2014 e nd -o f- year b al an ce - $4. 03 nullion d. Future ]iabdities to th e Fund • Reimbursement for cleanup of petroleum leaks and spills fr om tanks • Reimbursement for eligible cases clean ed up with federal LU ST Trust fu nd s • Pro vi de training to tank owners to comp]y wiili federa] training rnquirem en1s • Abandot mcl underground pet rol eu m tank removals 3
Overview of DENR's Budget Request DENR FY 2016 Budget Request • Status Quo Budget Request A. UE.NR is requesting NO expansion in FTEs B. DENR is requ esting NO expansion in personal sen rices C. DE.NR is requesting ~O expansion in operating expenses D. DE NR wiU con ti nue to use its exis ting resources to get t he job done Cf!NRGon.or~• Fund lludl!l"'Hi"""ry 1.-tala ll'i•c .. ;;,..,.. Pu t ting UE.NR's FY 2016 Budget Request in context ·with historical budge t history: • DENR's 2016 general fund budget request is ($274,434) less than its FY 2009 budget. • DENR 's 201 6 general fund budget request has fe wer general funds than in FY 2008. • DE NR ''S 201 6 budget request has (24.3) fe·wer FTE t han FY 1 98 7. ·R n , nc D.1 - R , HD 1i"T1 r 111 _ , 011'\" ,,.
DENRGOALS 1. Protect public health and the environment, 2. Maintain a business-friendly climate, and 3. Treat everyone as our customer. Including federal grant commitments DENR uses hundreds of measures to see if it is getting the job done; the number of Performance Indicators in the Budget Book are: • 40 for the Division of Technical and Financial Assistance , • 240 for the Dh ision of Em , ;ronmental Services, and • 14 for the Petroleum Release Compensation Program. 5
~ ~ Key Envkonmental Measure: Meeting Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards Particulate Matter 10 Trends in Sout h Dakota 50 II 410 I! . . lO .u "' "' 2& 2 4 )112• ,. • ,. 21 ,. . 26 z,. . ;M 1.C • ~o n n • • 23 • 11 • 2 J. .!( ]o • • 22 2l IU ll l'l )I ... N ,a 20 ,. ........ ..... · · ~ lC >- fi"- u . .1. a 11 17 H - - - - - ' 10 I C. C> GCl7 ,_ - 2000 200t :3Xl2 2003 2004 2 2CXll! 2007 a:al 3lOCI 2010 :!01 20 2 :!l 13 Calendar YeaJ Particulate Matter 2.5 Trends f or South Dakota 16 sf,. l4 a I I IT!e 1J I, ,,= ... ... ... - - 10 10 10 10 lD ' .J .c -= ,,= - - - - .c - - - - • - --..:. - - - - - - - ~.;. - ;a - • - - y I 1 1 7 7 - - - i - - - - - -.. - ..- - 6 4 - - - - - - - - ........ I- I- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 I I I 0 2001 2003 200! 2007 20,0 2012 20 13 201 1 Ca l n d Y, SD is 1 of only 7 states in full "Attainment" 6
Looming Air Quality Issues that could impact South Dakota's Full Attainment Status 1. EPA's Proposed 111(b) Rules • EPA's pl an to cut carbon di ox ide emissions from NEW power plan ts. * EP A's carbon di ox ide li mit for c oa l-fired plants - 1,100 pounds per megawatt-ho ur * EP A's carbon dioxide li mit for na tural-gas fired plants - 1,000 po un ds per megawatt -hour for larger units • Result wi ll be no new coal-fired plants built as th e technology to meet the lli mi ts for new coal- fi red plants is not commercia ll y available. 2. EPA's Proposed 111(d) Rules • EPA's pl an to cut carbon di ox ide emissions from EXISTING power plants • South Dakota has on ly one coal-fired power plant (Big Stone n ea r M il ba nk ) and one natural gas combined cyc le plant (Deer Cr ee k near Brookin gs) * About 74 per ce nt of our electrical production in 20 12 was renewable (50 per ce nt hydropower and 24 per ce nt wind) mak in g us a leader in low carbon em issions wi th only three states em itt: in g less ca rbon dioxide t ha n South Dakota. * Result wi ll be EP A's standard fo r SD of on ly 741 pou nd s per megawatt-hour is not possible wi th out shutting down th e B ig Stone plant an d stranding $384 mil li on of pollution controls currently under co nstruc ti on to meet EP A's Regional Haze ru le. * HB 1203 jeopardizes our potential li tigation ag ai nst EPA 3. EPA's Proposed Ozone Rules • As in dicat ed by gra ph s on preceding page, South Dako ta 's air meets ALL federal ambient air qua li ty standards, but EPA re cently proposed to lower th e air quali ty standard for ozone from th e current level of 0.075 pa rts per mi ll ion to bet vvee n 0.060 and 0.070. • DENR monitors ozone at six si tes th ro ug hout th e state; the g ra ph bel ow shows ozone co n ce ntrations at all six sites are GREATER than 0.060 parts per mi ll ion. • If South Dakota does not meet th e n ew lower ozone st an dard, EPA w il l impose cont ro l measures at a sig ni · ficant cost that wi ll result in no envi ro nmental benefit. 0 !lCl1 a. 0 10 7
~ ~ Key Environmental Measure : Meeting Surface Water Quality Standards Percent or Fecal Coliform Sample s That Meet South Dakota Surface Water Quality Standards .. .. - !!I - ... 11 .. ... ... 100 - :: - ,a .. """ .c: .-. .c: ""' • ;,. ;; .. - I& - ""' """ • II - - IA IA ,II ;; - • SI ,__ - -· la ,__ - • II II - - a 0 ,__ ,__ ,__ - IQ Cl - "" - ,- 7 I! I! - ,__ - - - - ,__ ,__ - - - ,-. ,- - - - - - - - - , - - - - - 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2008 200 7 200!! 2009 2 01 0 201 1 20 12 20 13 201 S Q te F:1 s ,o .a1 Y • ar Percent of Tota l Suspende d Solid s Samples Th at Meet Sou t h D kota Surface Water Quality Samples .. l ·l - ;l .. :L ~ ' ;l r;L ;l -:L - 1 00 'l ll al : l !i. 1 :s .. - - - - - I;:- 1 : ,_ - - - - - • • Iii,-. - i - Ii :;; ;: II II a '1 "' Cl :.\ 75 1 : - ,__ - ,__ - - ...... - - ,__ ,__ - ,- - - - ,__ - - - - - ,__ - - ,__ 25 ..,, 0 200 2 200 3 2 004 2CXJl:i 2006 2 007 2 008 2 000 20 10 20 11 20 , 2 2013 2 0, .. $ ... te Fl Pl Yw< Whi e 78 to 99 percent of the samples are meeting standards , some waters are f' sted as " impaired " under federal definitions . 8
Recommend
More recommend
