Transcript Highlights:

• For many years, we stored that water in underground aquifers.
• And we also work with the Central Arizona Water Conservation District staff because...
• It mandates that the State Natural Resource Conservation Board maintain authority over conservation permitting
• It mandates that the State Natural Resource Conservation Board maintain authority over conservation permitting
• Smarter long-term land use decisions that benefit both development and conservation.

Bills: SB1137, SB1176, SB1287, SB1335, SB1336, SB1445, SB1677

Keywords: underground utilities, utility locating, dig safe, call before you dig, 811, excavation safety, damage prevention, one-call center, locate request, white lining, large project coordination, buried infrastructure, subsurface utilities, utility marking, locator wire, locator strip, interactive positive response system, landlord duties, apartment community, mobile home park

Bills: HB 29, HB 685, HB 1633, HB 1689, HB 1690, HB 1918, HB 2010, HB 2500, HB 2608, HB 2626

Keywords: water audit, water loss, water loss mitigation plan, municipally owned utility, municipal utility, water conservation, Texas Water Development Board, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water leakage, leak detection, billing data accuracy, utility validation, water audit validation, water scarcity, water management, infrastructure, public utility, conservation plan, administrative penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• Conservation District.
• or any of the other aquifers that may be involved.
• We represent 91 of the 98 groundwater conservation districts.
• And we work with businesses, landowners, and government to protect and conserve the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer
• The surface means little to water's flow in the aquifer below.

Bills: HB29, HB685, HB1633, HB1689, HB1690, HB1918, HB2010, HB2500, HB2608, HB2626, HB29

Keywords: water audit, water loss, water loss mitigation plan, municipally owned utility, municipal utility, water conservation, Texas Water Development Board, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water leakage, leak detection, billing data accuracy, utility validation, water audit validation, water scarcity, water management, infrastructure, public utility, conservation plan, administrative penalty

Bills: HB29, HB685, HB1633, HB1689, HB1690, HB1918, HB2010, HB2500, HB2608, HB2626, HB29

Keywords: water audit, water loss, water loss mitigation plan, municipally owned utility, municipal utility, water conservation, Texas Water Development Board, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water leakage, leak detection, billing data accuracy, utility validation, water audit validation, water scarcity, water management, infrastructure, public utility, conservation plan, administrative penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• withdrawal of water from the aquifer outside the EA's jurisdictions.
• I'm the General Manager for the Edwards Aquifer Authority.
• So the cap and limits on how much can be used out of the aquifer remain in place. Thank you.
• District, the Prairie Lands Groundwater Conservation District, and the Martin Springs Edwards Aquifer
• Conservation District, each of which I serve as general counsel.

Bills: SB863, SB1190, SB1261, SB1413, SB1624, SB1662, SB1663, SB1855, SB1967, SB2124, SB2204, SB1623

Keywords: Edwards Aquifer, water conservation, reclaimed water, aquifer storage, environmental protection, water loss, municipally owned utilities, Texas Water Development Board, administrative penalties, water audit, water infrastructure, water supply, state water plan, water management strategies, water financing, municipal bonds, revenue bonds, public debt, obligations, TWDB

Transcript Highlights:

• from the aquifer outside the EAA's jurisdiction.
• Senate Bill 1863 resolves the oversight by authorizing the affected utilities to use Edwards Aquifer
• So the cap and limits on how much can be used out of the aquifer remain in place. Thank you.
• We represent 91 of the 98 groundwater conservation districts throughout the state.
• , the Prairie Lands Groundwater Conservation District, and the Barton Springs-Edwards Aquifer Conservation

Bills: SB863, SB1190, SB1261, SB1413, SB1624, SB1662, SB1663, SB1855, SB1967, SB2124, SB2204, SB1623

Keywords: Edwards Aquifer, water conservation, reclaimed water, aquifer storage, environmental protection, water loss, municipally owned utilities, Texas Water Development Board, administrative penalties, water audit, water infrastructure, water supply, state water plan, water management strategies, water financing, municipal bonds, revenue bonds, public debt, obligations, TWDB

Summary: The Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs heard several water-related bills, with testimony focused on drinking water quality, groundwater contamination notice, flood infrastructure funding, water rights conservation, and utility service areas. SB 1662 would limit TCEQ’s advance notice to public water systems to no more than 24 hours before testing after a consumer complaint, to reduce the chance of temporary treatment affecting results. SB 1663 would allow TCEQ to notify private well owners, groundwater conservation districts, and nearby residents by direct means about known groundwater contamination, rather than relying mainly on first-class mail and annual reporting. SB 2124 would move the deadline for publishing the Texas Groundwater Protection Committee’s annual report from April 1 to June 1. Witnesses on the first two bills described long-running water quality problems and delayed notice in their communities and supported the measures. No opposition was recorded, and each bill was left pending for a later vote. The committee also heard SB 1967, which would expand eligibility for Flood Infrastructure Fund financing to multipurpose projects that both reduce flooding and create water supply. Senator Hinojosa and Hidalgo County representatives described the Delta Reclamation Project as a shovel-ready example that would capture flood and drainage water, treat it, and produce new potable supply while also providing detention and flood mitigation. A Sierra Club witness also supported the bill, saying such projects could help manage floodwaters and reduce polluted discharges to bays and estuaries. The bill was left pending. A lengthy and divided discussion followed on SB 1413, which would expand the streamlined expedited release process for landowners seeking removal from a water or sewer CCN in additional counties. Senator Nichols said the bill was a property-rights measure aimed at legacy monopolies and bad actors who use CCNs to hold landowners hostage, while supporters described cases where developers could not get timely service, including fire flow, or were asked to fund infrastructure without reasonable recoupment. Opponents from rural water corporations and utility associations argued the bill would undermine investment in water infrastructure, strand debt, and weaken the return on planned expansion. PUC and TCEQ resource witnesses explained that compensation is handled case by case through appraisal and can include stranded costs, planning, design, construction, and some legal fees, but members noted the statute is unclear and discussed possible committee substitute language. Public testimony was closed with the bill left pending. Later, SB 1624 would allow the Texas Water Trust within the Texas Water Bank to hold donated water rights for conservation purposes and protect them from use-it-or-lose-it cancellation, and SB 863 would address Edwards Aquifer utilities that straddle the aquifer boundary by allowing them to continue using Edwards water within their certificated areas under specified conditions. Both bills were laid out, received no public opposition in the hearing, and were left pending.

Bills: SB 243, SB 1586, SB 1891, SB 1959, SB 2159, SB 2568

Keywords: wastewater treatment, environmental permits, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, package plant, environmental protection, water utilities, sewer services, ratemaking, regulatory authority, Class A B C D utilities, rate proceedings, financial integrity, aquifer, Edwards Aquifer, water injection, environmental regulation, groundwater management

Transcript Highlights:

• Registered as Doug Shaw on behalf of the Upper Trinity Groundwater Conservation District, testifying
• I'm the General Manager of the Upper Trinity Groundwater Conservation District.
• aquifer.
• It is Ed McCarthy on behalf of the Plum Creek Conservation District testifying for the bill.
• support essential infrastructure tied to groundwater conservation and district operations.

Bills: SB612, SB1855, SB2568, SB3058, HB49

Keywords: SB 612, Texas Water Code, Section 49.2127, conservation and reclamation district, water district, reclamation district, developer fees, pipeline construction, water pipeline, sewer pipeline, associated infrastructure, subdivision infrastructure, cost recovery, fee cap, actual reasonable documented costs, engineering fees, legal fees, inspection fees, infrastructure relocation, utility connections

Transcript Highlights:

• Conservation District. The Southeast Texas Groundwater Conservation District was created in 2003.
• Merlin Tuttle of Bat Conservation. The idea is to keep... populations under economic thresholds.
• If they need to be relocated, it's a wildlife conservation matter, not a pest control issue.
• This rapid growth has put a strain on our aquifers, and it is unrecoverable without... the ability to
• We sit on the western edge of the Trinity Aquifer.

Bills: SB1169, SB1285, SB1583, SB1611, SB1898, SB1976, SB2160, SB2161, SB2658, SB2661, SB2662, SB2692, SB1055, SB1359, SB2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, SB 1285, bats, bat protection, wildlife protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, Parks and Wildlife Code Section 63.101, hunting bats, bat possession, bat sales, bat trade, pest control, licensed pest control professional, animal control officer

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 2661 allows members of groundwater conservation districts to enforce their rules by setting
• It has a short-term life expectancy, and that's what I'm told that aquifer does.
• This is how we value our land and our aquifer systems.
• The TCEQ is not getting tested like the groundwater conservation... ...districts are.
• I represent a number of groundwater conservation districts in support of Senate Bill 2662.

Bills: SB1169, SB1285, SB1583, SB1611, SB1898, SB1976, SB2160, SB2161, SB2658, SB2661, SB2662, SB2692, SB1055, SB1359, SB2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, SB 1285, bats, bat protection, wildlife protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, Parks and Wildlife Code Section 63.101, hunting bats, bat possession, bat sales, bat trade, pest control, licensed pest control professional, animal control officer

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair. 2661 members groundwater conservation districts enforce their rules by setting reasonable penalties
• This is how we value our aquifer systems.
• I represent a number of groundwater conservation districts in support of Senate Bill 2662.
• Just is we can argue that that aquifer is going to always be there.
• It's always going to recharge and they sell all aquifers.

Bills: SB 1169, SB 1285, SB 1583, SB 1611, SB 1898, SB 1976, SB 2160, SB 2161, SB 2658, SB 2661, SB 2662, SB 2692, SB 1055, SB 1359, SB 2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, SB 1285, bats, bat protection, wildlife protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, Parks and Wildlife Code Section 63.101, hunting bats, bat possession, bat sales, bat trade, pest control, licensed pest control professional, animal control officer

Transcript Highlights:

• Cook's Branch Conservancy is a 7,000-acre piece of land that's home to bald eagles, provides drinking
• I show you registered as Paul Sarahan on behalf of Cook's Branch Conservancy testifying for the bill.
• I'm here on behalf of the Mitchell family and Cook's Branch Conservancy, which has been in our family
• The Southeast Texas Groundwater Conservation District consists of four counties.
• Members, this is Representative Zwiener's bill relating to the adoption of a water conservation program

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:

• Members, um, OWRB has studied our many numerous aquifers. Not all of them are built the same.
• Depending on the depth of the aquifer and other details on that, that cone of aquifer can affect a wider
• That's why they're wanting to separate it out by the aquifer, be able, they know kind of what the aquifer
• And the aquifer, what's the possibility of allowing a well on one piece of property with a fence line
• What's the possibility because you're talking about the aquifer.

Bills: SB1346, SB1509, SB1928, SB2028, SB2071, SB2110, SB2117, SB2127, SB2134, SB722, SB3

Keywords: water infrastructure, wastewater, investment program, loans, local government, SB1509, groundwater, water wells, well spacing, water rights, Oklahoma Water Resources Board, OWRB, basin, subbasin, maximum annual yield, aquifer management, water allocation, water permits, temporary permits, irrigation

Transcript Highlights:

• Depending on the depth of the aquifer and other details on that, that cone of aquifer can affect a wider
• area in some aquifers than it can others.
• In some aquifers, then it can't others.
• Depending on the depth of the aquifer and other details on that, that cone of aquifer can affect a wider
• area in some aquifers than it can others.

Bills: SB1346, SB1509, SB1928, SB2028, SB2071, SB2110, SB2117, SB2127, SB2134, SB722, SB3

Keywords: water infrastructure, wastewater, investment program, loans, local government, SB1509, groundwater, water wells, well spacing, water rights, Oklahoma Water Resources Board, OWRB, basin, subbasin, maximum annual yield, aquifer management, water allocation, water permits, temporary permits, irrigation

Summary: The committee began by introducing new member Rep. Dylan Travis, who was elected in a special election and will represent District 35. The first measures taken up focused on water policy. HB 1346, as amended, would create a revolving fund for water and wastewater infrastructure loans through the Oklahoma Water Resources Board, with the amendment removing population-based language so infrastructure needs can be considered more broadly; it passed 9-0. SB 1509 would make well-spacing standards apply uniformly across the state by aquifer rather than waiting on maximum annual yield studies, and OWRB staff explained that domestic wells are not affected and existing rules still protect landowners; it passed 6-3. SB 1928 would establish a five-year flex allocation for groundwater use, allowing producers to shift unused water from one year to another, and it passed 7-2. The committee also considered several agriculture and food-related bills. SB 2028 would authorize the sale of raw milk products without consumer notification or container labeling beyond indicating the product is unpasteurized; it passed 8-0. SB 2071 would align Oklahoma’s Grade A milk regulations with federal standards and increase the dairy inspection fee from 1 cent to 2 cents per hundred pounds, but after concerns from members and testimony from ODAF about the fee burden, the committee adopted an amendment restoring the 1-cent rate; the bill then passed 8-1. SB 2110 would allow sale of ungraded eggs off-farm at farmers’ markets or directly to consumers, including unwashed eggs, and passed 9-0. SB 2117 would clarify that the Department of Agriculture can stop the sale of contaminated grain and direct remediation or destruction in a current contamination event involving sewer leakage into a field; it passed 9-0. Other measures addressed livestock transport, crop protection, hemp, and a proposed reimbursement scheme. SB 2134 would create procedures for wreck services and emergency management to handle livestock involved in transportation accidents, with the Department of Agriculture setting humane handling policies; members discussed whether the bill should explicitly address state or county emergency management and rail incidents, and it passed 8-0. SB 2127 was described as a work in progress to address crop protection and nontraditional producer practices, especially amid difficult conditions for row-crop producers, and it passed 8-1. SB 722, after the committee rescinded a prior referral, was presented as a new section requiring ODAF to reimburse agricultural operations for economic losses caused by agency actions enforcing court-ordered rules from an attorney general suit; after extensive questioning about scope, valuation, and legal effects, the author laid the bill over for further work. Finally, SB 3, on a newly adopted PCS, was reframed from a biosolids bill into a hemp-definition bill intended to align state law with the new federal definition and reduce youth access to marijuana-like hemp products; it passed 8-0. The meeting then adjourned.

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:

• members, Senate Bill 1445 allows the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, for aquifer
• There's part of it that goes to administration and enforcement and part that goes to conservation and

Bills: SB1041, SB1363, SB1418, SB1419, SB1445, SB1447, SB1488, SB1519, SB1523, SB1560, SB1580

Keywords: electronic monitoring, nursing care, assisted living, resident rights, privacy, consent, surveillance, marijuana, rural opportunity, dispensary, economic development, licensing, social equity, unserved communities, Arizona, small modular reactors, energy regulation, environmental compatibility, utility construction, agricultural use

Transcript Highlights:

• Perry, relating to the provision by a political subdivision. and developers for certain water conservation

Bills: SB7, SB13, SB14, SB15, SB7, SB13, SB14, SB15, SB7, SB13, SB14, SB15

Keywords: gender designation, civil penalties, private civil rights, multiple-occupancy spaces, Texas Women's Privacy Act, impact fees, water conservation, reuse projects, developers, builders, local government, infrastructure, water efficiency, law enforcement, confidentiality, personnel files, employee records, misconduct, real property, fraud

Transcript Highlights:

• “Okay, but that’s in order to conserve water in the surrounding area.
• , a natural resource conservation district board.
• We represent the natural resource conservation districts. Thank you.
• , a natural resource conservation district board.
• center where we're teaching kids about the benefits of conservation.

Bills: HB2024, HB2053, HB2097, HB2116, HB2117

Keywords: water infrastructure finance authority, WIFA, water supply development, snowpack augmentation, cloud seeding, water augmentation, water financing, water infrastructure, Arizona water law, water conservation, groundwater recharge, stormwater recharge, reclamation and reuse, water rights, water supply projects, public-private partnership, long-term water augmentation fund, water provider, desalination, drought mitigation

Bills: HB1986, HB1694, HB1695, HB2030, HB1673

Keywords: clean fuel standard, alternative fuels, carbon intensity, emission reduction, greenhouse gases, transportation, sustainable aviation fuel, tax credit, greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy, Hawaii, economic development, carbon footprint, aviation sector, renewable fuels, local production, energy resilience, agricultural innovation, job creation, clean vehicles

Summary: The committee on Energy and Environmental Protection heard testimony on three measures related to cleaner fuels. On HB 1986, which would require the Department of Transportation to adopt rules for a clean fuel standard by January 1, 2028 and include reporting and public informational sessions, testimony was largely supportive from state commissions, fuel companies, airlines, and other industry and advocacy groups. Supporters said the bill would create a long-term framework for reducing emissions and developing cleaner fuels in Hawaii. Opposition came from Energy Justice Network, which argued that so-called clean fuels are not carbon-free, would be costly, and could delay a needed transition to electrification. The department later said it was monitoring the bill and was concerned about costs. No vote or final action was taken in the hearing. The committee then heard HB 1694, a sustainable aviation fuel tax credit bill that would provide a per-gallon credit for SAF, cap annual credits at $20 million, require reporting, and sunset in 2035. The Department of Taxation testified on administration, while the Department of Transportation said it supported the measure as a short-term strategy to jump-start SAF until the clean fuel standard ramps up. Airlines, fuel companies, the Hawaii Food Industry Association, the Hawaii Renewable Fuels Coalition, and others supported the bill, saying it would send a market signal, help close the cost gap with conventional jet fuel, and encourage local production and investment. Opponents, including Energy Justice Network, Life of the Land, and Ted Metros, argued the bill would be expensive, could lock in a transitional fuel system, and would not produce enough fuel to meet demand. Committee members asked about the likely impact and the share of total fuel demand the credit could support; DOT said the supported gallons would be only a very small percentage of annual demand and that the credit was intended to work alongside the future clean fuel standard. Finally, the committee took up HB 1695 HD1 on renewable fuel, which expands the renewable fuels production tax credit. Testimony was again mixed but generally supportive from the Department of Transportation, Department of Taxation, Island Energy Services, airlines, the Tax Foundation, Pana Pacific, and the Hawaii Farm Bureau. Supporters said the measure would encourage local feedstock production, create agricultural opportunities, and help attract investment in renewable fuels. Pana Pacific requested an amendment to explicitly include camelina in the definition of renewable feedstocks. Opponents, including Energy Justice Network and Life of the Land, repeated concerns about cost, imported feedstocks, and the risk of undermining full electrification goals. The hearing transcript does not show any vote or final committee action on HB 1694 or HB 1695 HD1.