Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hazardous Materials Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel hears proposal to let Homeland Security set hazardous‑chemical fee, raise facility cap
Summary
The Government Operations Division took testimony on Senate Bill 2082, a proposal to let the homeland security director set the state hazardous‑chemical facility fee and to raise the per‑facility cap.
Get email alerts on the Hazardous Materials Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Government Operations Division took testimony on Senate Bill 2082, a proposal to move the state hazardous‑chemical fee from a fixed line in law into an administratively adjustable fee and to raise the per‑facility cap.
Darren Hanson, Homeland Security Division director at the North Dakota Department of Emergency Services, said the current $25 fee was set in 1991 and has not been updated. “We’re trying to be more flexible with it,” Hanson told the committee, explaining the bill would allow the director to set the fee with notice processes like those used for state radio fees and would raise the statutory cap on how much a single facility can be charged.
Hanson described the fiscal estimate shown to the committee as an example using a $50 fee and a higher cap; that estimate produced roughly $582,000 in one‑year revenue, of which about half would be distributed to counties that host reportable facilities to support hazardous materials response programs. Hanson said the Bank of North Dakota program examples discussed earlier in the hearing were unrelated to the hazardous‑chemicals fee topic.
The bill would also create authority to assess penalties against entities that are required to file hazardous‑chemical reports but do not file on time. Hanson noted that some governmental and Department of Defense entities are required to report but currently do not pay fees; the proposal would give the division a penalty tool to improve compliance with reporting requirements.
Committee members asked for details about which sites would pay and about existing statutory exemptions for certain agricultural operations. Hanson said the bill keeps legislative oversight via caps in statute and that appropriations and fund use remain subject to legislative review. No vote was taken; the session functioned as a hearing to gather information and questions for staff.
