LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE
75th Regular Session
April 1, 1997
TO: Honorable Kenneth Armbrister, Chair IN RE: Senate Bill No. 665, Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
Committee on State Affairs By: Haywood
Senate
Austin, Texas
FROM: John Keel, Director
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on SB665 ( Relating
to the sale and delivery of certain motor fuel; providing criminal
and civil penalties.) this office has detemined the following:
Biennial Net Impact to General Revenue Funds by SB665-Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
Implementing the provisions of the bill would result in a net
impact of $0 to General Revenue Related Funds through the biennium
ending August 31, 1999.
The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal
basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions
of the bill.
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would transfer the responsibility for enforcement and
administration of rules for the regulation of motor fuel containing
ethanol or methanol from the Comptroller to the Commissioner
of Agriculture. In addition, the Commissioner of Agriculture
would be responsible for regulating and monitoring motor fuel
octane levels. Motor fuel dealers in the state would be responsible
for maintaining documents relating to postings or certifications
of automotive fuel ratings. The bill would increase civil
penalties for violations and provide for criminal and administrative
penalties. The bill would provide that fees currently authorized
to be collected by the comptroller for testing, inspection,
statement or record forms, sale of signs, or performance of
other services could be imposed only as determined necessary
by the Commissioner of Agriculture to administer the Act. The
bill would also provide that fees currently authorized to be
collected by the comptroller on motor fuel distributors, wholesalers,
or suppliers, without regard to whether the fuel is subject
to regulation under the Act, could be imposed only as determined
necessary by the Commissioner of Agriculture. The Commissioner
of Agriculture would be able to adopt rules relating to the
frequency of testing motor fuels, and would be required to consider
the funds made available through the imposition of fees when
adopting such rules.
Under current law, the comptroller
can collect fees in total amounts not to exceed the lessor of
the program's annual cost or the statutory cap of $500,000 per
year. The bill provides that the fees collected could only
be used by the Comptroller in an amount not to exceed $25,000
annually, and by the Commissioner of Agriculture for administration
and enforcement of the Act. The Commissioner of Agriculture
would determine the costs necessary to administer and enforce
the provisions of the Act.
Methodolgy
The Comptroller has had certain responsibility for enforcing
and administering rules relating to motor fuels containing ethanol
and methanol since 1989. As the sale of this type of motor
fuel has been minimal, the comptroller did not incur any significant
costs to administer the program, and therefore, did not collect
authorized fees. The Department of Agriculture is currently
responsible for inspecting and regulating the calibration of
all motor fuel pumps in the state. The Department of Agriculture
estimates that implementing the provisions of the bill would
cost $454,223 the first year and $404,248 each year thereafter.
In the first year, costs would include the purchase of octane
level screening equipment estimated at $92,038, in addition
to the annual cost of 7.6 FTE's, including 5.8 inspectors, and
$142,410 for sample analysis costs.
Because the current
program has no significant costs, this office assumes that fee
revenue collected by the comptroller would increase to cover
the program's estimated cost.
Additional revenue collected
from administrative penalties is not expected to be significant.
The
probable fiscal implications of implementing the provisions
of the bill during each of the first five years following passage
is estimated as follows:
The probable fiscal implications of implementing the provisions
of the bill during each of the first five years following passage
is estimated as follows:
Five Year Impact:
Fiscal Year Probable Probable Revenue Change in Number
Savings/(Cost) Gain/(Loss) from of State
from General General Revenue Employees from
Revenue Fund Fund FY 1997
0001 0001
1998 ($454,223) $454,223 7.6
1998 (404,248) 404,248 7.6
2000 (404,248) 404,248 7.6
2001 (404,248) 404,248 7.6
2002 (404,248) 404,248 7.6
Net Impact on General Revenue Related Funds:
Fiscal Year Probable Net Postive/(Negative)
General Revenue Related Funds
Funds
1998 $0
1999 0
2000 0
2001 0
2002 0
Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as
the provisions of the bill are in effect.
No significant fiscal implication to units of local government
is anticipated.
Source: Agencies: 551 Department of Agriculture
304 Comptroller of Public Accounts
LBB Staff: JK ,JD ,JH