Transcript Highlights:

• And what solutions have worked well.
• Better permits.
• permitting process.
• efficiently execute permits.
• The permitting process needs to be well-defined, consistent every time. Thank you.

Keywords: environmental review, permitting process, infrastructure, bipartisan legislation, economic growth, Nucor, West Virginia

Summary: The meeting focused on critical discussions surrounding the need for modernizing the federal environmental review and permitting processes. Witnesses from various sectors, including Nucor, provided testimony on the delays and costs associated with current regulations, emphasizing the impact on infrastructure and economic growth. Major projects in West Virginia, such as the Corridor H and Coalfield Expressways, were highlighted as examples of initiatives stalled by excessive permitting hurdles, prompting calls for bipartisan legislation to streamline these processes while maintaining environmental protections. The committee expressed a commitment to address these issues immediately, highlighting the urgency to enhance efficiency in permitting to facilitate economic development.

Transcript Highlights:

• > educational<00:24:50.640> furlow furlow as well as educational furlow furlow as well
• So I think the bill means well, but I think we're well on our way already to addressing those issues,
• So I think the bill means well, but I think we're well on our way already to addressing those issues,
• Um, I think the bill means well, but I think we're well on our way already to addressing those issues
• neighborhoods as well as vibrant Hawaii. neighborhoods as well as vibrant Hawaii.

Bills: HB1769

Keywords: criminal justice reform, rehabilitation, private prisons, racial equity, Native Hawaiians, community well-being, mass incarceration, 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 1769, which would require the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to incrementally reduce the number of people incarcerated in private out-of-state correctional institutions. The DCR director opposed the bill, saying the department does not control overall prison population levels because courts determine admissions, and arguing that Hawaiʻi’s in-state facilities are already over capacity, especially Halawa, which he said is 165% over design capacity. He said only a small portion of the population is under departmental control through furlough programs and argued that bringing people home would require building a new medium-security prison. Supporters, including the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, the Public Defender’s office, and several individuals, argued the bill creates a phased, accountable path to reduce reliance on mainland prisons and bring people home. Supporters emphasized the harms of separating incarcerated people from ʻohana and culture, the disproportionate impact on Native Hawaiians, and the need for diversion, treatment, re-entry support, and fair sentencing. Several testifiers also said the department has more control than it claimed, pointing to underused furlough options, reclassification, and empty beds at some in-state facilities, while others urged clearer statutory language and guardrails. Members questioned the director about whether people could be reclassified or moved to available beds at facilities such as Kulani and Waiawa, and about whether the department could do more through staffing and contract changes. The director said some proposals had been sent to the Department of Human Resource Development, but that major facility changes would be costly and that minimum-security facilities would need substantial upgrades to house medium-security inmates. After discussion, the chair said the committee would defer HB 1769 to Wednesday, February 18, 2026, at 11:30 a.m. for decision-making and adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, currently they have $27 million in the account. They get $30 million a year.
• I'm not tracking real well with the workforce piece and right now. If I may, Mr.
• Well, what is the... Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
• Well, I appreciate the question. In all reality, the agency is a state agency.
• Well, this, I appreciate the question. And in all reality, the agency is a state agency.

Bills: SB1290, SB1530, SB1847, HR1050, SB169, SB1377, SB1990, SB1991, SB1778, SB1579, SB1992, SB3, SB2028, SB1928, SB2127, SB2117, SB1439, SB1930, SB330, SB1191, SB2110, SB2134, SB2069, SB2095, SB1613, SB1246, SB1976, SB1346, SB1509, SB2071, SB259, SB1314

Keywords: 2-1-1 services, revolving fund, Department of Human Services, crisis pregnancy, abortion, legal funding, research funding, development rebate, Oklahoma Department of Commerce, tax incentives, higher education partnerships, Medicaid, ADvantage Waiver, home-based services, eligibility criteria, healthcare, senior services, Taiwan, Oklahoma, sister-state relationship

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, we honor the lineage of the 45th and its great accomplishments.
• There is a protest period as well.
• On page 8, it's section, I believe it's, well, page 8. Let me see.
• Well, what if? Well, what if? I think those are legitimate questions. What if?
• As well as, you know, federal drawdown.

Bills: SB1290, SB1530, SB1847, HR1050, SB169, SB1377, SB1990, SB1991, SB1778, SB1579, SB1992, SB3, SB2028, SB1928, SB2127, SB2117, SB1439, SB1930, SB330, SB1191, SB2110, SB2134, SB2069, SB2095, SB1613, SB1246, SB1976, SB1346, SB1509, SB2071, SB259, SB1314

Keywords: 2-1-1 services, revolving fund, Department of Human Services, crisis pregnancy, abortion, legal funding, research funding, development rebate, Oklahoma Department of Commerce, tax incentives, higher education partnerships, Medicaid, ADvantage Waiver, home-based services, eligibility criteria, healthcare, senior services, Taiwan, Oklahoma, sister-state relationship

Transcript Highlights:

• Shield Desert Storm as well as far more roles and far more places than I can list.
• Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, today we have Doctor Kalegreg.
• For safe and responsible gun ownership, and I believe that they are well on their way to that.
• Well, that really depends on how many students there are in a given school year.
• Well, how about the right not to be taxed out of your home in the first place? First place, Mr.

Bills: SB1290, SB1530, SB1847, HR1050, SB169, SB1377, SB1990, SB1991, SB1778, SB1579, SB1992, SB3, SB2028, SB1928, SB2127, SB2117, SB1439, SB1930, SB330, SB1191, SB2110, SB2134, SB2069, SB2095, SB1613, SB1246, SB1976, SB1346, SB1509, SB2071, SB259, SB1314

Keywords: 2-1-1 services, revolving fund, Department of Human Services, crisis pregnancy, abortion, legal funding, research funding, development rebate, Oklahoma Department of Commerce, tax incentives, higher education partnerships, Medicaid, ADvantage Waiver, home-based services, eligibility criteria, healthcare, senior services, Taiwan, Oklahoma, sister-state relationship

Transcript Highlights:

• of things out of the individual permit process.
• , or an individual permit will be required.
• That's happened not just in DNREC, but other agencies as well.
• That's happened not just in DNREC, but other agencies as well.
• Well, hopefully there won't be a dispute.

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met and first considered SB 321 with Senate Amendment 1, the community solar utility billing bill. The sponsor explained that it would consolidate the two-bill system for community solar subscribers into one utility bill, with the utility forwarding the subscriber fee to the solar facility through an escrow mechanism so costs are not shifted to other ratepayers. Testimony from the solar industry, the Public Advocate, and environmental advocates supported the measure, emphasizing easier enrollment, fewer barriers for low-income customers, and guaranteed savings. The committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, but after a roll call vote it was released from committee. The committee then heard SB 9 with Senate Amendment 1, a wetlands protection bill creating a state non-tidal freshwater wetlands permitting program. The sponsor and DNREC described a framework of exemptions, general permits, and individual permits based on wetland type and value, with an advisory committee to develop regulations. Witnesses explained that “exceptional value” wetlands would include unique wetland communities and high-functioning wetlands, and that the bill was intended to preserve important habitat while allowing farming, drainage, and other exempt activities to continue. Some members raised concerns about flooding, land classification, and the balance of the advisory committee, while supporters said the bill was the product of broad stakeholder consensus and would protect wetlands without unduly harming agriculture or development. Public comment on SB 9 was strongly supportive from environmental groups, the Delaware Native Species Commission, the Home Builders Association, the Farm Bureau, The Nature Conservancy, and affordable housing advocates, who said the bill balanced conservation with practical land use concerns. After remote testimony, the committee took a roll call vote and SB 9 was released from committee. The meeting concluded with remarks thanking the chair for her service and instructions for members to sign the backers before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• of things out of the individual permit process.
• , or an individual permit will be required.
• , or an individual permit will be. can probably go through one of those general permits that we talked
• Well, you know what?
• Well, hopefully there won't be any dispute.

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met to consider two Senate bills. SB 321, with Senate Amendment 1, would change community solar billing so subscribers receive one consolidated utility bill instead of separate bills from the utility and the solar provider. Supporters said the bill would simplify enrollment and payment, improve customer retention—especially for low-income customers—and include safeguards such as guaranteed savings and an escrow mechanism to prevent cost shifts to other ratepayers. After public testimony from solar developers, the Public Advocate, the Sierra Club, and others, the committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, so the vote was circulated to absent members and the bill was later reported out for floor action. The committee then heard SB 9, with Senate Amendment 1, a long-negotiated wetlands protection bill. The sponsor and DNREC explained that it would create a state non-tidal wetlands program with exemptions for certain agricultural, conservation, and routine activities, general permits for some lower-impact projects, and individual permits for higher-value wetlands. Witnesses described the bill as a compromise among environmental, agricultural, development, and local government stakeholders, while some members raised questions about flooding, landowner impacts, wetland delineation, and the role of the regulatory advisory committee. Public testimony was broadly supportive from environmental groups, the Farm Bureau, builders, engineers, and affordable housing advocates. The committee then voted to release SB 9 from committee. At the end of the meeting, members offered thanks and remarks recognizing the chair’s service and leadership on environmental and energy issues. Both bills were ultimately released from committee and reported out.

Transcript Highlights:

• own permitting department.
• I've dealt with permitting.
• I've dealt with permitting.
• I've dealt with permitting.
• I've dealt with permitting.

Bills: SB2066

Keywords: permitting, construction, efficiency, state projects, county collaboration, funding, staffing shortages, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees on Energy, Intergovernmental Affairs, and Government Operations heard Senate Bill 2066 on county permitting and inspection. Testimony focused on whether the bill should exempt state projects from county permitting requirements. One testifier opposed the measure, arguing it would bypass established permitting processes, weaken good government, and put the public at risk. A DOE representative said the intent was to speed up state projects, but suggested a different approach: funding county positions dedicated solely to state permits, possibly as a pilot program, rather than removing county review entirely. Committee members discussed the difficulty of moving state projects through county systems, the lack of special treatment, and whether a more systematic or standardized process could be created for repetitive projects. After the discussion, the chairs announced a substantive rewrite of SB 2066. The amended version would delete the county-permitting exemptions for state projects and instead create a cooperative working group to address the intersection of state projects and county permitting needs. The revised measure would also include a blank appropriation for counties to fund personnel to expedite permitting for state projects only. Members clarified that any funded staff would be dedicated solely to state projects. The committee then took votes on the revised measure. The committees adopted the amended bill. The Government Operations Committee recommended the Senate draft one version, and members present voted yes, with Senator Awa excused. The measure was adopted with the revised approach and an effective date set for April 19, 2042.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, with a red jacket, he looks good no matter what. I know. Picture, are you?
• Well, Mr. Chairman, I think I would do a due pass on 1280 as this. Okay.
• And could you comment on lines 15, 16, 17 as well? That is just exactly what it was before.

Bills: HB1541

Keywords: septic systems, environmental quality, public health, wastewater management, licensing and permitting, 908, all

Summary: The committee reconvened on April 4 to consider two bills. House Bill 1280, Representative Brandenberg’s bill on election approval of projects, was briefly discussed after the chair said legislative council had raised constitutional concerns and the bill could invite lawsuits. Despite that caution, a member moved a do pass recommendation, it was seconded, and the committee approved HB 1280 by roll call vote. The committee then turned to House Bill 1318. The chair explained that after consulting attorneys, the phrase “notwithstanding any other provision of law” in line 7 was considered problematic and would be removed through a crafted amendment. He also said the proposed sunset clause was not a good idea and indicated the bill would be held until the following Thursday morning to allow further review. A member asked about other lines, and the chair said those provisions remained as previously amended. The committee discussed procedural handling of the bill, including whether reconsideration of a prior motion was needed, and confirmed the bill would remain in committee. No further action was taken before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, I don't think we have any questions. We're good to go. Also, I have a TCEQ resource witness.

Bills: SB2031, SB2386, SB2476, SB2801, SB2843, SB2844, SB2846, SB2885

Keywords: deer breeding, chronic wasting disease, wildlife management, release site, landowner rights, TCEQ, environmental quality, administrative actions, public notice, legislative oversight, water supply, Angelina and Neches River Authority, ownership transfer, public utilities, Certificate of Convenience and Necessity, SB 2801, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Parks and Wildlife Code, field trial permit, hunting dog field trial

Transcript Highlights:

• Small businesses are worried if their permits will get processed.
• I assume you agree that part of the permitting reform has to be transmission to permitting reform because
• Well thank you Senator and thank you for meeting with me.
• But yeah, well, maybe yeah, take a little homework assignment.
• Well, a lot of great work is being done there.

Keywords: nuclear energy, permitting process, energy production, public lands, national parks, uranium imports, legislative bills, infrastructure development

Summary: The committee meeting was dominated by discussions on a variety of legislative bills including major topics such as nuclear energy advancement, the effects of regulatory hurdles on energy production, and proposals to improve national park staffing and maintenance. Members expressed concerns over the federal government's handling of uranium imports and the necessity for maintaining a robust domestic nuclear supply chain. Efforts to streamline permitting processes to facilitate more efficient energy project development were also a focal point, alongside public testimony from stakeholders in the energy and environmental sectors. The meeting highlighted the urgent need for infrastructure development to meet rising energy demands while addressing climate change impacts.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well those those are recognized?
• . permitting. permitting.
• permitting uh you know, routing systems. permitting uh you know, routing systems.
• <00:48:36.080> in regarding standing up a permitting in regarding standing up a permitting
• Recommendation to pass permits.

Bills: SCR8, SCR40, SCR83, SCR179, SCR90, SCR94, SCR159, SCR165, SCR177

Keywords: building permits, seniors, health care, disability, safety modifications, county regulations, expedited processing, environment, pollution, tourism, disposable bodyboards, polystyrene, marine ecosystems, lithium-ion batteries, environmental safety, recycling, public safety, waste management, Honolulu, Maui County

Summary: The committee heard several resolutions related to water, coastal management, and permitting. Early measures included SCR 8 on faster county action for certain home-modification permits for older adults and people with disabilities, SCR 40 on banning disposable body boards, SCR 83 on creating a lithium-ion battery disposal facility, SCR 179 on enforcing Maui fire-code provisions for brush clearance and emergency access, and SCR 90 on kupuna-friendly permit requirements. No testifiers were present for those measures, and the chair moved through them without taking votes in the portion provided. The most extensive discussion was on SCR 94, endorsing Waikiki as a world surfing reserve, and SCR 159, urging shared guiding principles for restoring and maintaining Waikiki’s beaches and shoreline. University of Hawaii testimony said the surfing-reserve designation would bring recognition, could help attract grants, and would require a stewardship committee and management plan, but would not itself block beach nourishment or shoreline restoration. Members asked about possible effects on dredging, beach nourishment, and shoreline structures; the witness said impacts on surfing were not expected to be immediate or significant. For SCR 159, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development supported the resolution but requested clarifying amendments to broaden references to law, stakeholder collaboration, and coastal science expertise. The Waikiki Beach Special Improvement District Association also supported the measure, emphasizing coordinated maintenance, public access, and the economic importance of Waikiki beaches, while noting that existing legal agreements and court decisions should be reflected in the resolution. The discussion also covered whether the state and private owners share repair and maintenance obligations for Waikiki seawalls; testimony said existing agreements remain relevant but must yield to current law. The committee also heard SCR 165 designating March as Water Month, with support from the Board of Water Supply and others, and SCR 177 requesting DAGS to convene a cooperative working group on state projects needing county permits. Mary Alice Evans said the latter would help expedite permitting, especially for housing and other state projects, and would complement efforts to standardize county permitting processes. No final votes or dispositions were announced in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• restaurants to do catering do not need to obtain a permit.
• Well, we'll do the whole panel. Catherine, thank you, Chairman.
• as well as some of the corporate restructuring initiatives.
• HPA Capital Management is a well-respected investment firm based in Dallas.
• Well, that gets confusing. A bump...

Bills: SB483, SB522, SB783, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1664, SB1762, SB1856, SB1877, SB1977

Keywords: utility, proprietary information, customer data, data protection, electric service, customer information, emergency communication, electric utility, privacy, certification, public accountants, interstate licensing, accounting, regulatory amendment, energy efficiency, construction regulations, building codes, Texas, sustainability, cost-effectiveness

Transcript Highlights:

• I do sense see it that it could very well.
• Well, this was a little bit confusing here.
• We have 11,000 permitted acres today.
• They are trucked to the northeast side of Oklahoma City and into Lincoln County as well.
• Well, we had to find a line of what is bad and what is what is acceptable.

Bills: HB3005, HB3007, HB3403, HB1907, HB3175, HB3986, HB3466, HB3411, HB4246

Keywords: climatology, emergency declaration, Oklahoma Climatological Survey, environment, weather data, public policy, state governance, natural resources, advisory councils, sunset law, water quality, hazardous waste, solid waste, radiation management, public health, biosolids, land application, environmental quality, agriculture, wastewater treatment

Transcript Highlights:

• If have a house and some stock wells.
• So, I, well, that's uh a possibility always.
• I well that's uh a possibility always.
• My standard online signed up as well.
• municipalities<01:21:33.840> in Well, it started with municipalities in Well, it started

Bills: SF0099, SF0116, SJ0006

Keywords: easement, electricity delivery, public utility, prescriptive easement, landowner rights, surface water, drainage utilities, municipality, elections, environmental management, shared parenting, family law, joint custody, child well-being, parental rights, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The sand mine upstream repeatedly violating its permit, harming our land and water.
• I do believe there are resource witnesses available to answer questions as well.
• I can answer any questions, and we do have somebody here from the agency as well.
• that are already exempt from permitting under state law.
• Okay, um, so are they currently doing any metering on these types of wells?

Bills: HB3115, HB5671, HB5693, SB790, SB1055, SB1302, SB1504, SB1625, SB1663, SB2692

Keywords: Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater, water wells, domestic well, livestock well, exempt well, metering device, well meter, groundwater conservation district, Special District Local Laws Code, Water Code, Section 36.117, groundwater regulation, water rights, aquifer management, municipal utility, retail public utility, groundwater export, water supply contract, election

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources heard testimony on a series of water, utility, and groundwater-related bills. Early items included HB 5693, which would let Drainage District 7 hold board elections in November of odd-numbered years when a countywide election is occurring, and HB 5671, which would update the Johnson County Special Utility District by clarifying board eligibility, allowing bond issuance, and removing redundant TCEQ approval language to reduce costs and delays. Both bills were left pending after brief testimony from bill sponsors and local witnesses. The committee also heard SB 1504, which would update the Gulf Coast Authority to allow video-conference participation in meetings, and SB 1302, aimed at closing a TCEQ permitting loophole that allowed dischargers with prior denials or suspensions to reapply through an automated process without meaningful review. SB 2692 drew substantial discussion: it would change the signature threshold for outside-city-limits customers appealing municipal utility rates to the PUC by customer class. Valero supported the bill as a way to avoid requiring large-volume users to gather signatures from unrelated residential customers, while the City of Corpus Christi opposed it, arguing that lowering the threshold to one customer could trigger expensive appeals costing $500,000 to $1 million. A PUC witness said such cases are increasing and that the agency would need additional staff under the fiscal note. SB 790, creating a simplified PUC complaint process for small water and wastewater billing disputes, and SB 1663, expanding TCEQ notice requirements for nearby residents when groundwater contamination is discovered, were also heard and left pending. Additional bills included HB 3115, clarifying that the Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District cannot require meters on exempt domestic or livestock wells; SB 1055, raising the Southeast Texas Groundwater Conservation District’s production fee cap from 1 cent to 7 cents per 1,000 gallons; and SB 1625, requiring private water and wastewater utilities to report cybersecurity incidents to TCEQ and DIR. The committee then took up pending business and adopted a substitute for SB 7, which made several changes to water fund use, eminent domain coordination, and EDAP-related provisions, and voted 10-0 to report it favorably. The committee also adopted a substitute for HB 2347, a county water conservation program bill, and reported it favorably 9-1. HB 5675 and SB 2476 were each reported favorably 10-0. The meeting concluded with adjournment.

Bills: HB3115, HB5671, HB5693, SB790, SB1055, SB1302, SB1504, SB1625, SB1663, SB2692

Keywords: Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater, water wells, domestic well, livestock well, exempt well, metering device, well meter, groundwater conservation district, Special District Local Laws Code, Water Code, Section 36.117, groundwater regulation, water rights, aquifer management, municipal utility, retail public utility, groundwater export, water supply contract, election

Transcript Highlights:

• for approval, including other permitted wells that may be impacted within the district.
• Or amending groundwater permits.
• for approval, including other permitted wells that may be impacted within the district.
• from the unreasonable impacts of new groundwater permits or permit amendments in Gonzales County.
• And they replaced the water well, but we were out of water on our place for about almost a year, well

Bills: HB2018, HB1633, HB1689, SB612, SB3058

Keywords: agricultural conservation, land preservation, environmental protection, wildlife habitat, Texas Farm and Ranch, groundwater conservation district, Texas Water Code, water permit, permit amendment, groundwater permit, water rights, aquifer, well registration, exempt wells, beneficial use, water conservation, groundwater quality, well plugging, Hill Country Priority Groundwater Management Area, surface water resources

Summary: The Senate Water, Agriculture, Rural Affairs Committee heard several bills focused on groundwater management, water infrastructure, and agricultural land conservation. SB 612 would limit certain water districts in Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy counties from charging developers pipeline construction fees above actual, documented costs; the committee substitute removed a developer challenge mechanism to preserve district discretion over construction standards. HB 1633 would require groundwater conservation districts to consider registered exempt wells when reviewing or amending permits, and testimony from landowners, district representatives, and advocacy groups largely supported the bill as a way to protect domestic and livestock wells from drawdown caused by large export projects. HB 1689 would clarify that export fee revenues may be used for well operability, alternative water supplies, and aquifer monitoring, including through interlocal cooperation, and HB 3058 would give the Post Oak Savannah Groundwater Conservation District authority to use export fees for county road improvements and environmental programs tied to well inspection and groundwater management. HB 2018 would clarify that the Texas Farm and Ranchland Conservation Program is intended to purchase conservation easements only on working agricultural lands, with support from cattle raisers and Farm Bureau representatives. The committee also considered HB 29, which would require large water systems to validate water loss audits and submit mitigation plans; a committee substitute removed the water-loss threshold and adjusted the timeline for more detailed validation. Public testimony on the bills was generally supportive, with several witnesses describing declining well levels, road damage from export projects, and the need to preserve agricultural land and local water supplies. The committee adopted committee substitutes and voted favorably on HB 29, HB 1689, HB 2018, SB 612, and SB 3058, recommending several of them for the local and uncontested calendar; HB 1633 was left pending awaiting a committee substitute.

Transcript Highlights:

• office catering do not need to obtain a permit.
• You can move that microphone because I can hear very well.
• This goes along well with bills from last week with Senator Parker and the Texas Stock Exchange, as well
• HBK is a well-respected investment firm.
• Like, well, let's do this and let's do that.

Bills: SB483, SB522, SB783, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1664, SB1762, SB1856, SB1877, SB1977

Keywords: utility, proprietary information, customer data, data protection, electric service, customer information, emergency communication, electric utility, privacy, certification, public accountants, interstate licensing, accounting, regulatory amendment, energy efficiency, construction regulations, building codes, Texas, sustainability, cost-effectiveness

Summary: The Senate Business and Commerce Committee met with a quorum and first took up pending business, voting out several bills. Senate Bills 1697, 1569, 1202 as substituted, 1029, 1364, 1185, 924, 1008 as substituted, 264, 1376, and 1358 as substituted were reported favorably, with some sent to the local and uncontested calendar. The committee also adopted a substitute for SB 1202 and later corrected votes on several measures. SB 924 and SB 1376 drew some opposition, while the rest of the pending bills were reported without dissent or with limited nays. The committee then heard testimony on SB 1856, which would create an annual capacity-cost recovery rider for Entergy Texas customers in the MISO region. The author and Entergy argued the bill would better match rates to actual capacity costs and improve transparency, while the Texas Association of Manufacturers and the Public Utility Commission raised concerns about the short 10-day review period, rider proliferation, and the preference for full rate cases over piecemeal adjustments. The bill was left pending. The committee also heard and left pending SB 522 on CPA reciprocity, SB 1664 requiring TDUs to provide clearer, standalone rate-change disclosures, SB 1877 expanding OPUC’s access to market data, SB 1254 and SB 1255 as TDLR cleanup bills on professional employer organizations and mold assessors, SB 1341 updating manufactured housing rules, SB 1239 on sovereign debt and Texas governing law, and SB 1259 streamlining the surveyor-in-training licensing process. Additional bills discussed included SB 1977, which would cap recoverable legal expenses in electric, water, and sewer rate cases; OPUC and some consumer advocates supported the idea as a way to reduce ratepayer costs, while utility representatives warned it could discourage participation and increase rate shock. The committee also heard SB 1762 clarifying that geothermal energy conservation wells are not battery resources, and SB 783 allowing SECO to proceed with future energy-code rulemaking for state-funded buildings. Both drew supportive testimony from industry and environmental groups. All remaining bills heard during the meeting were left pending, and the committee recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• consider several criteria for approval, including other permitted wells that may be impacted within
• or permit amendments.
• Well, a little over a year, actually.
• We'll see their wells go dry.
• You heard the previous bill about exempt wells and how we handle exempt wells, and so all of that is

Bills: HB2018, HB1633, HB1689, SB612, SB3058

Keywords: agricultural conservation, land preservation, environmental protection, wildlife habitat, Texas Farm and Ranch, groundwater conservation district, Texas Water Code, water permit, permit amendment, groundwater permit, water rights, aquifer, well registration, exempt wells, beneficial use, water conservation, groundwater quality, well plugging, Hill Country Priority Groundwater Management Area, surface water resources