Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Senate Environmental & Republican Policy Committees Hold A May 24 Hearing On Marcellus Shale Gas Industry

The Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee and Republican Policy Committee have scheduled a joint hearing on the Pennsylvania natural gas industry on Wednesday, May 24.
The committees will hear from two witnesses: David Spigelmyer, Marcellus Shale Coalition and Tad Hill, President of Calpine, America’s largest generator of electricity from natural gas and geothermal resources.
The hearing will be held in Room 8E-B East Wing of the Capitol starting at 10:00.  Click Here to watch the hearing live online.
Sen. Gene Yaw (R-Lycoming) serves as Majority Chair of the Senate Environmental Committee and can be contacted by sending email to: gyaw@pasen.gov.  Sen. John Yudichak (D-Luzerne) serves as Minority Chair and can be contacted by sending email to: yudichak@pasenate.com.
Sen. David Argall (R-Schuylkill) is Chair of the Republican Policy Committee.  He can be contacted by sending email to: dargall@pasen.gov.

Joint Conservation Committee Green Paper On Glass Recycling In PA

The Joint Legislative Air and Water Pollution Control and Conservation Committee Tuesday released another in it series of Green Papers, this one on Glass Recycling in Pennsylvania.
It describes glass recycling efforts, starting in 1988 with Act 101 and curbside recycling to present day challenges and opportunities.
Click Here for a copy of the Green Paper.  Click Here for others in this series.
For more information on recycling market opportunities, visit the PA Recycling Markets Development Center’s website.
Sen. Scott Hutchinson (R-Venango) serves as Chair of the Joint Conservation Committee.
For more information, visit the Joint Conservation Committee website, Like them on Facebook or Follow them on Twitter.  Click Here to sign up for regular updates from the Committee.

Penn State: American Chestnut Rescue Will Succeed, But Slower Than Expected

The nearly century-old effort to employ selective breeding to rescue the American chestnut, which has been rendered functionally extinct by an introduced disease-- Chestnut blight, eventually will succeed, but it will take longer than many people expect.
That is the gist of findings from a new study conducted by a research team composed of scientists from Penn State, The American Chestnut Foundation and State University of New York.
This research should tamp down expectations of both the public and some members of the science community that victory is imminent, but it also provides reassurance that the rescue ultimately will result in chestnuts flourishing in forests again, according to lead author Kim Steiner, professor of forest biology, Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences.
To reach their conclusions, researchers reviewed and evaluated decades of breeding records and transgenic experiments, new experimental data, and made projections related to how recurrent selection and incorporation of transgenic material into breeding lines will expedite blight resistance.
They considered experimentally based estimates of heritability and genetic gain for blight resistance that were never available before this research was conducted.
"Those estimates are why we know, now, for sure that it is just a matter of time," Steiner said.   "Very few people understand the magnitude of the breeding challenge embarked upon by The American Chestnut Foundation when it began in 1983. Just to complete the B3F2 generation of breeding and selection — the final generation as originally envisioned — has meant that 73,000 trees must be created by hand pollination and grown and tested in plantations for a minimum of three years."
B3F2 is the third backcross, intercrossed generation of Chinese and American chestnuts. The process began in 2002 with the foundation's main breeding program and probably will not be completed until 2022, Steiner added.
Furthermore, it is being duplicated through the work of volunteers in 13 affiliated state programs. The Pennsylvania program is overseen by Sara Fitzsimmons, a research technician in Penn State's Department of Ecosystem Science and Management and one of the study's co-authors.
Developing an accurate and comprehensive status report on the chestnut-rescue effort and identifying next steps and expectations of progress were the main reasons behind the research, explained Steiner, who is a board member of The American Chestnut Foundation and senior science adviser to the board.
"For a number of years, the foundation has made seed from B3F2 trees available for special purposes," he said. "But the average blight resistance of those seedlings was not expected to be high until the B3F2 plantation is completed and culled to the few hundred most-resistant trees. Our current findings indicate that, even then, average levels of resistance will not match Chinese chestnut."
However, some seeds from the B3F2 plantation will carry genes for high resistance, and there may be enough of them to begin restoration work, Steiner noted.
Ultimately, he explained, the foundation's goal is to give the American chestnut the "genetic wherewithal" to survive to maturity and evolve on its own. "So we are not concerned about uniformity from tree to tree in the way that a landscape nursery must be."
In the research, recently published in New Forests, progress and future steps were summarized in two approaches-- The American Chestnut Foundation's system of hybridizing with the blight-resistant Chinese chestnut species and then backcrossing repeatedly to recover the American-type tree, and State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry's transformation of the American chestnut with a resistance-conferring transgene.
That effort has been sponsored by the New York Chapter of The American Chestnut Foundation.
Several decades of effort have been invested in each approach, and more work remains, researchers noted, but results provide the best experimental evidence since the blight hit North America sometime after 1904 that success is within practical reach.
"We believe that the breeding program may need an additional one or two generations of recurrent selection to maximize resistance," Steiner said. "The New York transgenic tree still must undergo regulatory review before release, and it must be tested in harshly competitive, natural environments before its true worth is understood. If it proves out, we expect that the New York work will be integrated with the foundation's conventional breeding program because both lines of work have inherent strengths."
Steiner, who is director of The Arboretum at Penn State, where the Pennsylvania program's B3F2 plantation is growing, called the chestnut-restoration effort the most ambitious, protracted and technically difficult rescue of a species that ever has been undertaken.
And he credits the volunteer members of The American Chestnut Foundation for making it happen.
As a graduate student at Michigan State University in the fall of 1970, Steiner wrote a breeding plan to solve the American chestnut problem as a class assignment. He clearly remembers the professor's assessment that the plan was workable but utterly impractical.
Industry, the professor said, had no interest in American chestnut, and government agencies would not undertake to breed a blight-resistant chestnut after abandoning two earlier long-term programs with the same goal.
"As it turns out, now 47 years later, he was correct on those two points," Steiner recalls. "But he did not reckon on the ability of a nonprofit organization like The American Chestnut Foundation to accomplish a 'lost-cause' conservation task through the power of thousands of volunteer citizen-scientists and philanthropic supporters."
Their enthusiasm and the wonderful example of this model inspired Steiner in the late 1990s to offer his services to the organization as a volunteer science adviser. And he is not alone. A great many university, agency and industry scientists have assisted the foundation in small and large ways.
The promise that the foundation's breeding program will succeed has leveraged tens of millions of dollars in supporting research, according to Steiner.
"And since the mid-1990s, there has been an explosion in published research about American chestnut, a species that has been ecologically and economically insignificant since the early decades of the last century," he added.
The research was funded by The American Chestnut Foundation.
For more information, Dr. Steiner may be reached at 814-865-9351 or send email to: kcs@psu.edu.
To learn more about efforts to repopulate American Chestnut trees in Pennsylvania, visit the PA Chapter of the American Chestnut Foundation website.  To become a member and receive regular updates from the PA Chapter, Click Here.
(Photo: American Chestnut tree planting in April in Allegheny National Forest.)

Brodhead Watershed Assn. Native Plant Sale June 9-10 In Monroe County

Calling all gardeners to the Brodhead Watershed Association’s annual Native Plant Sale, where beautiful and environmentally responsible flowers and shrubs will be sold.
The popular annual sale will be held Friday and Saturday, June 9-10, at Pocono Township Fire Company’s carnival building on Route 611, Tannersville, Monroe County.
The Friday sale, held 5:30 to 7:30 p.m., is for members only. (Members receive a 10 percent discount; new members can sign up at the sale.) Saturday’s sale will run 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
“This will be an exciting sale because we have 65 different perennials to offer,” said Deb Mattie of Paradise Township, plant sale organizer.
Almost every gardener in the Poconos seeks out deer-resistant plants, and the BWA won’t disappoint them. There will be 40 varieties from which to choose.
“A large majority of the plants are deer resistant and will be labeled as such,” Mattie said. “Also, plants for pollinators and butterflies will be labeled.”
Also new this year: bigger pot sizes.
“So think bigger and better,” said Mattie. “There will be something for everyone regardless of what kind of garden you have – full sun, part shade, shade, dry or wet.”
BWA thanks the sponsors of the Native Plant Sale: Bolock Funeral Home & Crematory, Strauser Nature's Helpers, Desaki Restaurant, Colonial Used Auto Sales, Lansdowne Insurance Agency, Pocono Lawn & Landscape, Frogtown Chophouse and Retro Fitness. Additional support was provided by plant sale "friends" Vincent's Deli & Catering, Resort Beverage and The Cook's Corner.
For information and printable plant lists, visit the Native Plant Sale webpage or call 570-839-1120 or send email to: info@brodheadwatershed.org with questions.  Cash, checks and credit cards will be accepted.
(Photo: Volunteers helping to plant rain garden, including students from Pat Bixler’s Environmental Studies class, hard at work at East Stroudsburg High School South in Monroe County.)

Senate Bill Filling Funding Gap In DEP’s Underground Storage Tank Program OK’d By Committee

The Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee Monday unanimously approved legislation--Senate Bill 649 (Yudichak-D-Luzerne)-- which extends expiring environmental cleanup programs and fills a funding gap in DEP’s Underground Storage Tank Program.
“The Storage Tank and Spill Prevention Act contains important provisions that enable small tank owners to prevent and mitigate environmental liabilities before they become more intractable environmental problems for Pennsylvania,” said Sen. John Yudichak, Minority Chair of the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee. “The department does an exceptional job of meeting the demands of regulation and enforcement, but the increased allocation provided under Senate Bill 649 will go a long way to ensuring DEP is adequately staffed to meet future demands of these two important environmental programs and overall program operating costs.”
Senate Bill 649 amends the Storage Tank and Spill Prevention Act to reauthorize grant and environmental cleanup programs administered by DEP– the Underground Storage Tank Environmental Cleanup Program and the Underground Storage Tank Pollution Prevention Program.
Both programs are currently set to expire on June 30, 2017; Senate Bill 649 extends them by five years, through June 30, 2022.
The programs assist small business and residential owners of underground storage tanks with grants ranging from $2,500 to $4,000 for environmental remediation, as well as fund necessary cleanup of underground storage tank releases that must be undertaken by DEP.
Senate Bill 649 also seeks to allow DEP to request full reimbursement from the Underground Storage Tank Indemnification Board for operating costs of its storage tank program—including costs of inspections and enforcement—for over 40,000 registered tanks at 13,000 facilities throughout Pennsylvania.
The bill would authorize the transfer of an additional $4 million annually from the Underground Storage Tank Indemnification Fund to pay for DEP’s administrative costs.
The bill is now on the Senate Calendar for action.
To learn more about storage tank regulation, visit DEP’s Storage Tanks webpage.  (Click Here for more background on the Act.)

Effective Small MS4 Stormwater Programs Workshop June 14-15 In Dauphin County

The Chesapeake Stormwater Network will host a workshop on Effective Small MS4 Stormwater Programs Workshop on June 14-15 in Middletown, Dauphin County.
Participants will learn about the key elements of MS4 stormwater permits, full cycle stormwater best management practices implementation and BMPs for existing development.
The workshop will be held at the Londonderry Township Building, 783 S. Geyers Church Road, Middletown.
The deadline for registrations is June 12.  Click Here to register.  There is a $20 registration fee.
For more information on programs, initiatives and other upcoming events, visit the Chesapeake Stormwater Network website.
More information on stormwater management is available on DEP’s MS4 Stormwater webpage.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation On Proposal To Zero Out EPA Chesapeake Bay Funding

The Trump Administration Tuesday released the details of its fiscal year 2018 budget for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which proposes to zero out funding for the Chesapeake Bay Program, the Great Lakes, and other EPA Geographic Programs.
In response, Chesapeake Bay Foundation President William C. Baker issued this statement:
“It is outrageous that the Administration would eliminate programs that protect clean water, like the Chesapeake Bay Program—this is a program that is effective and yielding results.
“The Chesapeake Bay Program has strong bipartisan support because it is working. Female crab numbers are up, oysters are rebounding, and we have had record acreage of Bay grasses in each of the last four years.
“In addition, the Bay and its rivers and streams support hundreds of thousands of jobs, and are also critical to our quality of life; our property values; and safe, drinkable water.
“People across the nation value clean water, and their Representatives in Congress heard that message when the Administration attempted to zero out funding for the rest of this fiscal year.
“The Bay Program is the glue that holds the multi-state restoration effort together. If it is eliminated, there is the very real chance that the Bay will revert to a national disgrace with deteriorating water quality, unhealthy fish and shellfish, and water-borne diseases that pose a real threat to human health.
“The federal/state effort to restore local rivers, streams, and the Chesapeake Bay is a prime example of the cooperative federalism that the Administration has indicated it would like to foster. It makes no sense to end this partnership, especially when it is showing such success.
“The Chesapeake Bay is a national treasure and our children and grandchildren will benefit from the work being done today.”
For more on Chesapeake Bay-related issues in Pennsylvania, visit the Chesapeake Bay Foundation-PA webpage.  Click Here to sign up for Pennsylvania updates (bottom of left column).  Click Here to become a member.

Analysis: House/Senate Republicans Introduce DEP Permit/Regulation Reform Bills, So Far, None Address The Real Problem

House Speaker Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny) Monday told members of the Pennsylvania Press Club his Republican Caucus has introduced 10 or more bills aimed at reforming the way the Department of Environmental Protection reviews permits and regulates industry.
He said DEP really means “Don’t Employ Pennsylvanians” because it’s “bureaucratic red tape filibuster” is sending employers to other states as a result of delays in processing permits.
Speaker Turzai said the “excellent” proposals made by House Republicans will bring more transparency and accountability to the permit review process, as well as reducing permit review times.
It should be noted the General Assembly and Governor cut DEP General Fund monies by 40 percent and its staff by 25 permit over the last decade which has had a significant impact on not only the speed of permit reviews, but the ability of DEP to accomplish its mission.
The FY 2017-18 budget bill passed by House Republicans the beginning of April imposed more across-the-board cuts on DEP.
House Republicans have, instead, supported and repeatedly endorsed a Fee-For-Protecting The Environment Model, rather than use general taxpayer dollars, but enactment of the fees needed to support DEP programs always lag at least two or three years behind the actual need.  (Click Here for an example of the Safe Drinking Water Program.)
DEP has received deficiency notices from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other federal agencies specifically citing lack of staff and other financial resources for not meeting minimum requirements in the Safe Drinking Water, Air Quality, Surface Coal Mining, Water Infrastructure Funding and other programs.
At the same time DEP is receiving these notices from federal agencies, the Trump Administration is proposing 40 percent or more in cuts to the grants states earn by administering federal environmental protection programs.  Thirty percent of DEP’s budget is federal funds.  (Click Here for more.)
DEP Initiatives Underway
DEP now has significant initiatives underway, even with its very limited resources, to address the permitting concerns Secretary McDonnell and members of the General Assembly have identified over the last year he served as Acting Secretary.
At his May 15 Senate confirmation hearing, Secretary McDonnell summarized his approach to dealing with the challenges at DEP--
“Over my almost 20 years in state government, I’ve had the chance to see almost every aspect of our agency.  From our policy making and regulatory functions to our budget and human resources apparatus.
“Through it all I prided myself on being open to collaboration, being honest about problems and listen to all perspectives to help my colleagues make meaningful decisions.
“It is no secret the Department faces challenges.  Over the past year we’ve continued to address those issues.
“We are modernizing and improving our permitting processes, collaboratively addressing the Commonwealth’s Chesapeake Bay obligations, and we’ve created an e-permitting platform and e-inspection app to improve our partnerships with the regulated community and increase our transparency.
“We’ve refocused on engaging with stakeholders to identify problems and solutions and we’ve begun investing in the most critical asset we have in the Department, our people.”
Among the reform measures DEP has underway are--
-- Listening Sessions To Hear About Issues From Consultants, Permittees: DEP completed a series of 7 regional listening sessions with consultants and permit applications early in the year to learn what DEP is doing right and wrong with its basic Chapter 102 erosion and sedimentation control and NPDES water quality permitting process.  The results of that process and recommended changes will be ready to release in mid to late June.  (Click Here for more.)
-- New General Permit For Low-Impact Projects Of 5 Acres Or Less Instead Of Full Permit: One result of the listening sessions is already being started-- developing a new General Permit for Chapter 102 erosion and sedimentation control permits for low impact projects like projects on farms, instead of a full permit. DEP’s workload evaluation found as many as 40 to 50 percent of the projects DEP now requires full permits for are projects of 5 acres or less. (Click Here for more.)
-- ePermitting Platform: Secretary McDonnell told both the Senate and House Appropriations Committees in March DEP’s new ePermitting platform has already reduced the modules required for mining permits by 20 percent.  Since the system requires correct, step-by-step input of information, it also reduces errors and deficiencies in applications submitted significantly.  This is potentially huge because 60 to 80 percent of the 30,000 permit applications DEP receives contain errors or other deficiencies.  He said DEP would be expanding the system to erosion and sediment permits next.  (Click Here for more.)
-- Electronic Documents System: Secretary McDonnell told both the Senate and House Appropriations Committees in his budget testimony in March DEP has already taken the first steps toward an agency-wide electronic documents management system that will speed submissions to the agency and make the agency more transparent to the public by giving better access to documents without taking staff time for document reviews.  (Click Here for more.)
-- Regional Permit Coordination Office: Secretary McDonnell told both the Senate and House Appropriations Committees in March he formed a special Regional Permit Coordination Office to better coordinate the handling of pipeline and other projects that cross DEP regional office boundaries
-- Electronic Field Inspection Reports: Secretary McDonnell told both the Senate and House Appropriations Committees in his budget testimony in March DEP has now equipped its Oil and Gas Program inspectors with iPads to fill out inspection reports electronically and submit them to agency databases making staff much more efficient and effect.  Previously staff worked with paper and had to recopy field notes into a database at the office. He said he hopes to expand the initiative to other programs.  (Click Here for more.)
-- Other Solutions Pros/Cons: During a February Senate Transportation Committee hearing, DEP also discussed a variety of recommendations pro and con for improving the permit review process.  (Click Here for more.)
These are the kinds of realistic, grind-it-out-on-the ground, hands-on management of programs DEP needs to improve its programs with the resources it is able to cobble together.
House Republican “Reforms”
Here’s a quick review of what House Republicans view as “reforms” of DEP’s permitting and regulatory process-
-- Expedited Environmental Permit Review For Licensed Professionals: House Bill 1352 (Bloom-R-Cumberland) directs DEP to develop an alternative permit review process for all applications submitted by a licensed professional engineer, landscape architect, geologist and land surveyor that requires publication of public notice, schedule required public meetings and hearings and initiative a technical review within 10 working days of the receipt of an application and it is declared complete and requires DEP to make a decision on the permit within 45 days.  It also prohibits DEP from charging an “additional” fee for receipt or processing of an application submitted by a licensed professional (sponsor summary).  Here’s a question, do you really want an expedited permit review for a permit related to a hazardous waste facility or landfill submitted by a land surveyor?  Just one of the many, many difficulties that plague this vague proposal.  There is no funding associated with this proposal to actually improve permit review times.
-- Tracking DEP Applications: House Bill 587 (Zimmerman-R-Lancaster) requiring DEP to develop another system for tracking the status of permit applications (sponsor summary).  DEP already has eFACTS which tracks permit review status, although it does need to be upgraded since it hasn’t been touched in 20 years.  With no funding to support this added requirement, it represents just another unfunded mandate on DEP.
-- Approving E&S Permits Whether Or Not They Meet Standards: House Bill 588 (Zimmerman-R-Lancaster) requiring DEP to approve erosion and sedimentation control permits whether or not they meet environmental standards within a set time frame (sponsor summary).  Various studies by DEP show between 60 and 80 percent of 30,000 permit applications-- most completed by engineers-- come in the door at DEP with deficiencies.  Do we want to compound these errors by issuing permits with these deficiencies?   Again, there is no funding to backup this new requirement.
-- Citing Specific Regulations In Deficiency Notices: House Bill 1353 (Bloom-R- Cumberland) would require DEP to cite specific regulations or statutes when it declares an application deficient (sponsor summary).  DEP also ready does this in deficiency notices.
-- Listing DEP Permits: House Bill 1003 (Ortitay-R-Allegheny) requiring DEP to list all its permits in the PA Bulletin and online (sponsor summary).  Billed as a way to “streamline DEP permitting,” it does nothing of the sort.  It only makes the PA Bulletin bigger and adds more costs.  DEP already has an existing online DEP Permit Application Consultation Tool that leads potential applicants through a series of questions to answer the basic question of What Environmental Permits Do I Need For My Project?  There is also no funding associated with this proposal, so it’s another unfunded mandate on DEP.
-- IFO Verification Of Costs Of DEP Regulations: House Bill 1237 (Keefer-R-Cumberland)-- would require the Independent Fiscal Office to verify the cost of the regulations and then provide the House and Senate with 30 calendar days or 10 legislative days to vote on the proposal (sponsor summary). Interestingly, there is no similar requirement for legislation going through the General Assembly and there is no funding associated with this proposal, so it’s another unfunded mandate.  (Click Here for more.)
-- General Assembly Vote On DEP Regulations: House Bill 911 (Rothman-R-Cumberland) would send regulations to the House and Senate, assign them to the appropriate committee and require an informational hearing before the regulations would be voted up or down (sponsor summary). There is no criteria for evaluating the regulations other than cost in the bill.  No assessment of benefits or the reason the regulations were adopted in the first place-- direction of state and/or federal law.  And if the General Assembly can kill a regulation if it does nothing at all. (Click Here for more.)
-- Eliminate Church, School Water Supplies From State Regulation: House Bill 776 (Zimmerman (R-Lancaster) would no longer require thousands of church-owned facilities-- churches, schools, camps and businesses-- with their own water supplies from being required to meet state Safe Drinking Water Act requirements (sponsor summary).  It’s billed as a simplification of the permit program and unneeded regulation. The legislation risks Pennsylvania’s primacy for administration the federal Safe Drinking Water Program and the loss of $100 million a year in federal funds to improve drinking water systems.  (Click Here for more.)
-- Rolls Back Protections From Temporary Suspension Of Mining Permits: House Bill 1333 (Gabler-R-Clearfield) would eliminate the current DEP limit on temporarily ceasing of surface coal mining operations of 180 days and replace it with the less stringent federal requirement that has no specific time frames (sponsor summary).  There is no requirement for a maintenance or stabilization plan for the site to prevent pollution and financial guarantees for restoring the site if a mine operator goes bankrupt. (Click Here for more.)
-- Transferring Permit Authority For Farm Projects To State Conservation Commission:  Rep. David Zimmerman (R-Lancaster) circulated a co-sponsor memo for legislation that would transfer permit authority for all farm-related projects from DEP to the State Conservation Commission which has no staff to review these permits.  There is no funding associated with this bill and represents another unfunded mandate.
-- Exempts Farm High Tunnels From DEP Permit Requirements: Rep. David Zimmerman (R-Lancaster) circulated a co-sponsor memo to exempt high tunnels (greenhouse-like structures designed to extend the growing season on farms) from Stormwater Management Act permit requirements.  It’s billed as a way to simply permit reviews by exemption.
Senate Republican Initiatives
Senate Republicans have also introduced some of the same “reforms” as the House Republicans, plus their own ideas--
-- General Assembly Approval Of DEP Regulations: Senate Bill 561 (DiSanto-R-Dauphin).  (Click Here for more.)
-- Taking Oil & Gas Penalty Monies From DEP: Senate Bill 32 (Hutchinson-R-Venango) would take oil and gas penalty monies from DEP and deposit them in the General Fund where it could be spent on any program in state government (sponsor summary).  The sponsor believes DEP now has an incentive to penalize oil and gas operators more under the current system to make up for cuts to DEP’s budget made by the General Assembly.  It’s right in his sponsor summary.  
-- Tracking DEP Applications:  Senate Bill 487 (Vogel-R-Beaver), same as House Bill 587 (Zimmerman-R-Lancaster) above.
-- Rollback DEP Drilling Regulations Waste Reporting: Senate Bill 486 (Vogel-R-Beaver) would rollback DEP’s Chapter 78A drilling regulations to report waste generated every 6 months rather than monthly (sponsor summary).
-- Limit State’s Ability To Control Methane Emissions: Senate Bill 175 (Reschenthaler-R- Allegheny) prohibits the state from adopting its own methane emission limits from oil and gas development or any other source of methane and instead requires the adoption of any federal standards.  (Click Here for more.)
Will Final Budget Address The Real Issues?
We’ll see if the final FY 2017-18 state budget begins to address the real issue with DEP’s permit review and environmental protection programs-- strangling them with cuts in funding year after year and not investing in real solutions-- like IT and other upgrades-- to support streamlined permit review systems.
Turzai Says He Would Stay On As Speaker If He Runs For Governor

Subscribe To Receive Updates:

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner