74(R) SB 290 House Committee Report

                          BILL ANALYSIS



C.S.S.B. 290
By: Henderson (Culberson)
2-28-95
Committee Report (Substituted)



BACKGROUND

The federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 require all states to
develop and implement pollution-reduction plans in nonattainment
areas.  The Employer Trip Reduction (ETR) Plan, mandated for severe
nonattainment areas, requires employers with 100 or more employees
at a single work site to increase average passenger occupancy per
vehicle in commuting trips between home and the workplace during
peak travel periods.  The average occupancy per vehicle rate must
be increased by at least 25 percent.



PURPOSE

SB 290 suspends the implementation of the employer trip reduction
program for 180 days after this Act takes effect.



RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly
grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer,
institution, or agency.



SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS

SECTION 1.  (a) Notwithstanding any Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (commission) rule to the contrary, the
commission is required to immediately suspend until the 181st day
after this Act takes effect, implementation of the Employer Trip
Reduction Program as required by the federal Clean Air Act and the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
           (b) Continues to require affected employers to submit
an employer trip reduction program to the commission, but excuses
them from the actual performance of the plan until the 181st day
after the effective date of this Act.


SECTION 2.  (a), (b)  Allows the governor to extend the suspension
of the employer trip reduction program for 45 days by executive
order if consent is present in the form of a consent resolution of
the Texas House and Senate; the governor may exercise this
suspension authority beginning the day that this Act expires, and
the governor may order additional, successive 45 day suspensions. 

           (c)  Allows the governor to seek a series of successive
45 day waivers from the EPA of enforcement of and compliance
deadlines for, federal guidelines relating to the employer trip
reduction program.
           (d)  Prohibits the commission from seeking any waivers
for enforcement of and compliance deadlines for the employer trip
reduction program.



SECTION 3.  (a)  Notwithstanding any other contrary commission
rule, an affected employer making a good faith effort to comply
with commission rules regarding employer trip reduction is
considered to be in compliance with those rules.
           (b)  Notwithstanding any commission rule, or any other
provision of an employer trip reduction program created by
commission rule, an affected employee may not be required to comply
with employer trip reduction plan if the employee does not drive
more than 30 miles one-way from home to work, or does not spend
more than one hour traveling one-way from home to work.
           (c)  An employee's letter to their employer is evidence
that they qualify under (b) of Section 3 of this act.


SECTION 4.  If an employer submits an employer trip reduction plan
to the commission, the commission may not take any enforcement
action against the employer if the enforcement action is related to
employer trip reduction.


SECTION 5. Emergency clause.
           Effective date: upon passage.



COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE

SECTION 1 of the original and substitute are identical.

SECTION 2 of the original is identical to SECTION 5 of the
substitute.

SECTION 2 of the substitute is new language not in the original,
providing as follows:
           (a), (b)  Allows the governor to extend the suspension
of the employer trip reduction program for 45 days by executive
order if consent is present in the form of a consent resolution of
the Texas House and Senate; the governor may exercise this
suspension authority beginning the day that this Act expires, and
the governor may order additional, successive 45 day suspensions. 

           (c)  Allows the governor to seek a series of successive
45 day waivers from the EPA of enforcement of and compliance
deadlines for, federal guidelines relating to the employer trip
reduction program.
           (d)  Prohibits the commission from seeking any waivers
for enforcement of and compliance deadlines for the employer trip
reduction program.


SECTION 3 of the substitute is new language not in the original,
providing as follows:
           (a)  Notwithstanding any other contrary commission rule,
an affected employer making a good faith effort to comply with
commission rules regarding employer trip reduction is considered to
be in compliance with those rules.
           (b)  Notwithstanding any commission rule, or any other
provision of an employer trip reduction program created by
commission rule, an affected employee may not be required to comply
with employer trip reduction plan if the employee does not drive
more than 30 miles one-way from home to work, or does not spend
more than one hour traveling one-way from home to work.
           (c)  An employee's letter to their employer is evidence
that they qualify under (b) of Section 3 of this act.


SECTION 4 of the substitute is new language not in the original,
providing as follows:  If an employer submits an employer trip
reduction plan to the commission, the commission may not take any
enforcement action against the employer if the enforcement action
is related to employer trip reduction.


SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION

SB 290 was considered by the House Environmental Regulation
Committee in a public hearing on February 28, 1995.  For purposes
of testimony, the committee considered the following related bills
together:  HB 992 and SB 290.  The committee considered a complete
substitute for
SB 290.  The following persons testified in favor of one or more of
the bills:
     Rep. John Culberson (HB 992 and SB 290). 
     Rep. Gerard Torres (HB 992 and SB 290).
     G.C. Chip Gill, representing Vastar resources, Inc. (HB 992
and SB 290).
     Jon Fisher, representing Texas Chemical Council HB 992 and SB
290).
     Bob Stout, representing Mitchell Energy Development Corp. (HB
992 and SB 290).
     Michael White, representing the Greater Houston Partnership
(HB 992 and SB 290).
     Clay Pope, representing the City of Houston (HB 992 and SB
290). 
     Mary Miksa, representing herself and Texas Association of
Business (HB 992 and
     SB 290).
By one motion, the complete substitute for SB 290 was adopted by
the committee and SB 290 was reported favorably as substituted with
the recommendation that it do pass and be printed and be sent to
the Calendars Committee by a record vote of seven (7) ayes, no (0)
nays, no (0) pnv, and two (2) absent.  Without objection, HB 992
was laid on the table subject to call.