By: Sims, Brown S.B. No. 978
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
1-1 relating to cost-benefit analysis of environmental rules proposed
1-2 for adoption by certain state agencies.
1-3 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
1-4 SECTION 1. Subchapter B, Chapter 2001, Government Code, is
1-5 amended by adding Section 2001.0225 to read as follows:
1-6 Sec. 2001.0225. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL
1-7 RULES. (a) This section applies only to a rule adopted by the
1-8 General Land Office, the Department of Agriculture, the Texas
1-9 Natural Resource Conservation Commission, the Railroad Commission
1-10 of Texas, or the Texas Department of Health the intended result of
1-11 which is to:
1-12 (1) exceed a standard set by federal law;
1-13 (2) exceed an express requirement of state law; or
1-14 (3) exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement or
1-15 contract between the state and an agency or representative of the
1-16 federal government to implement a state and federal program.
1-17 (b) Before adopting a major environmental rule covered by
1-18 this section, a state agency covered by this section shall consider
1-19 and estimate the cost the proposed rule will have on this state and
1-20 the net benefits the proposed rule will provide for this state.
1-21 (c) When giving notice of a major environmental rule covered
1-22 by this section, a state agency covered by this section shall
1-23 incorporate into the fiscal note required by Section 2001.024 a
1-24 draft impact statement that includes the cost and net benefits of
2-1 the proposed rule. In addition to the cost and net benefits, the
2-2 draft impact statement must:
2-3 (1) state that there is an opportunity for public
2-4 comment on the draft impact statement and that all comments will be
2-5 incorporated into the final cost-benefit analysis or will otherwise
2-6 be responded to in the publication of the final rule;
2-7 (2) describe, if applicable, reasonable alternative
2-8 methods for achieving the purpose of the rule that were considered
2-9 by the agency and state the reasons for rejecting those
2-10 alternatives in favor of the proposed rule; and
2-11 (3) identify the data and methodology used in making
2-12 estimates required by this section.
2-13 (d) A state agency order finally adopting a rule covered by
2-14 this section shall revise the draft impact statement into a final
2-15 cost-benefit analysis that incorporates comments received or states
2-16 the reasons the agency disagrees with each submission or comment.
2-17 (e) A rule covered by this section does not take effect
2-18 unless the draft impact statement and final cost-benefit analysis
2-19 are prepared according to this section.
2-20 (f) It is the intent of the legislature that a state agency
2-21 covered by this section spend no more funds in drafting and
2-22 adopting rules as required by this section than the agency would
2-23 have spent under the requirements of the law as it existed
2-24 immediately before September 1, 1995. It is the intent of the
2-25 legislature that a state agency covered by this section redirect
2-26 resources used in the proposal and adoption of rules immediately
2-27 before September 1, 1995, to accomplish the purposes of this
3-1 section.
3-2 (g) In this section:
3-3 (1) "Cost" means a direct or indirect adverse effect
3-4 of a rule, including an adverse effect that is economic in nature,
3-5 an increased cost to state or local government, and an increase in
3-6 risk to human health, safety, or the environment that may result
3-7 from practices required by or expected to be implemented in order
3-8 to comply with the rule or from likely alternatives to practices
3-9 prohibited by the rule.
3-10 (2) "Major environmental rule" means a rule the
3-11 specific intent of which is to regulate an activity to protect the
3-12 environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental
3-13 exposure that is universally applied to an entire sector of the
3-14 economy, that has a major impact on a broad segment of the economy,
3-15 or that has a significant impact on any single segment of the
3-16 economy.
3-17 (3) "Net benefits" means the overall risk reduction,
3-18 considering the potential risks posed by a rule, plus other
3-19 benefits expected from the rule.
3-20 SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 1995, and
3-21 applies only to an environmental rule proposed by a state agency on
3-22 or after that date.
3-23 SECTION 3. The importance of this legislation and the
3-24 crowded condition of the calendars in both houses create an
3-25 emergency and an imperative public necessity that the
3-26 constitutional rule requiring bills to be read on three several
3-27 days in each house be suspended, and this rule is hereby suspended.