HBA-SEP H.C.R. 90 77(R) BILL ANALYSIS Office of House Bill AnalysisH.C.R. 90 By: Madden Environmental Regulation 3/25/2001 Introduced BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Most urban areas across the country, including several in Texas, have become or are close to becoming "ozone nonattainment areas" according to Environmental Protection Agency standards. Traditional air quality control strategies have focused on emission sources within a designated attainment area and have typically included specific controls on industrial facilities and vehicle emissions within the area. Strategies aimed at controlling industrial emissions target specific industries and facilities, which must bear the initial costs of installing emission control technologies, although the public eventually shares in this burden as costs are passed on to individual consumers. While pollution control technologies can be effective in reducing emissions, the technology that many companies are required by the state implementation plan under the Clean Air Act (SIP) to purchase can cause a tremendous financial strain on an individual corporation and affect entire industries. Some industries, including aerospace manufacturing, agricultural chemical production, gasoline terminals, and oil and natural gas production and refineries must purchase costly maximum achievable control technology to be in compliance with the SIP. Small businesses, including dry cleaners, auto body shops, and bakeries are not exempt and they too must bear the high costs of compliance; some of these businesses will not be able to afford the expensive technology and may be forced to close. The high costs of pollution reduction efforts affects consumers as well; many industries must pay exorbitant prices for cleaner fuels, such as low-sulfur coal, and this cost is inevitably passed on to those who purchase the goods. While the state fully intends to comply with its SIP, a comparison of the direct and indirect costs of various strategies would enable it to more effectively direct its efforts in this regard. House Concurrent Resolution 90 requests the Congress of the United States to modify the Clean Air Act to allow the EPA to permit states to consider costs when comparing various emission control techniques. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the opinion of the Office of House Bill Analysis that this bill does not expressly delegate any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution. ANALYSIS House Concurrent Resolution 90 requests the Congress of the United States to modify the Clean Air Act to allow the United States Environmental Protection Agency to permit states to consider costs when comparing various emission control techniques.