Bills: HB 279, HB 310, HB 365, HB 391, HB 420, HB 422, HB 638

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Transcript Highlights:

• This permit establishes baseline groundwater.
• Quality levels both low and high prior to mining which are used to assess groundwater restoration efforts

Bills: HB279, HB310, HB365, HB391, HB420, HB422, HB638, HB279, HB310

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Bills: HB279, HB310, HB365, HB391, HB420, HB422, HB638, HB279, HB310

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Bills: SB 28

Keywords: groundwater, groundwater conservation district, Water Code, Water Development Board, modeled available groundwater, aquifer, water permit, groundwater transfer, export groundwater, out-of-district transfer, management area, desired future conditions, well permit, retail public utility, potable water, emergency interconnect, subsidiary, controlled entity, aquifer management, water resources

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, groundwater management, water conservation, district planning, environmental regulation, sustainability, groundwater, conservation, fees, agricultural uses, water regulation, wastewater treatment, environmental testing, pollutants

Transcript Highlights:

• Texas before issuing or amending groundwater permits.
• Or amending groundwater permits.
• and in the management of groundwater by those groundwater districts.
• districts or groundwater wells in the district.
• Relating to certain groundwater export fees collected by groundwater districts, HB 1689 by Representative

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:

• in Texas before issuing or amending groundwater permits.
• When considering an application for a groundwater permit, groundwater conservation districts (GCDs) must
• and the management of groundwater. or by those groundwater districts.
• It's essential for the inspection and monitoring of groundwater districts and our groundwater wells in
• Post-Oak Savannah Groundwater District.

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

Bills: SB650, HB3667, SB28, HB3201, SB1184, HB1800, SB 28

Keywords: permit issuance, regulatory framework, business operations, efficiency, application process, lottery, gambling, internet gaming, mobile application, criminal offenses, lottery regulations, occupational licensing, fraud prevention, criminal background checks, lottery couriers, SB 1184, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, wine collection seller, collectible wine, vintage wine

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm a groundwater engineer, been in around Texas for over 30 years on groundwater issues.
• I'm a groundwater engineer, been 65 in around Texas for over 30 years on groundwater issues.
• Yes, I think that is a key purpose of a groundwater conservation district is to conserve groundwater.
• 276 Yes, I think that is a key purpose of a groundwater conservation district is to conserve groundwater
• So, um, but again, I mean, it's the groundwater district's job to monitor that groundwater.

Bills: HB24, HB27

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management

Summary: The committee met to hear House Bills 27 and 24 on groundwater issues in East Texas, with members and witnesses focusing on a proposed large-volume groundwater export project and the need for more science before major permitting decisions are made. HB 27, which was within the special session call, would direct the Texas Water Development Board to conduct a hydrogeologic study of the aquifers in the affected area and temporarily pause new export permits while the study is underway. HB 24, a separate bill that would limit certain production and export permits to 5% of modeled available groundwater, was laid out but the chair said it would not be moved out of committee. Testimony on HB 27 was largely supportive, though some witnesses were neutral. Supporters, including representatives from a water supply corporation, the Trinity River Authority, Environmental Defense Fund, and the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, said the region lacks enough hydrologic data, that the proposed pumping could affect private wells, surface water, and local economies, and that the state needs better information on sustainable yield and groundwater-surface water interaction. Several witnesses emphasized that groundwater conservation districts need clearer tools and better data, while also noting concerns about property rights and the rule of capture. Committee members discussed the scale of the proposed project, the absence of a groundwater conservation district in Houston County, and the possibility that the study should examine desired future conditions and maximum sustainable pumping rather than only modeled available groundwater. The committee adopted the committee substitute for HB 27 and voted it out favorably to the full House with a recommendation that it do pass, be printed, and be sent to the Committee on Calendars. The roll call was unanimous, 11 ayes and 0 nays. After the vote, members briefly reflected on the complexity of the issue and the need to continue working on broader groundwater policy in the interim and next session. HB 24 was discussed later in the meeting, but no final action on that bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• What I want to emphasize is how I think that this bill will protect rural groundwater supplies and in
• I work a lot with the groundwater conservation districts on tools that they need, but growth is also
• And so what we're seeing is a lot of these muds developments occurring where groundwater is the sole
• availability study from any, um, developer that uses groundwater for a subdivision, and I think it was
• They must require that if the builder developer is going to use groundwater as a supply of water.

Bills: HB24

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management

Bills: HB24

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management

Transcript Highlights:

• Other areas have groundwater as a big option.
• by exempting from groundwater conservation district, or GCD, permitting requirements groundwater wells
• Again, we support brackish groundwater development.
• We support brackish groundwater project initiatives and protecting our fresh groundwater supplies for
• , the fresh groundwater, of those that are permitted.

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources heard House Bill 2109, which would remove certain long-proposed reservoir projects from the state water plan after 50 years without progress. Chairman Van Deaver and many landowners, local officials, timber interests, and conservation advocates testified in support, arguing that the Marvin Nichols Reservoir has burdened Northeast Texas landowners for decades with the threat of eminent domain, depressed property values, and uncertainty over homes, farms, ranches, schools, churches, and cemeteries. Supporters also said the project would flood tens of thousands of acres, require extensive mitigation, harm timber and agriculture, and that Texas now has better alternatives such as conservation, reuse, aquifer storage and recovery, and desalination. Several members expressed sympathy for the affected families and questioned whether a project could remain in the plan indefinitely without progress. Opposition came from North Texas water interests, including the North Texas Commission, Tarrant Regional Water District, and the Texas Water Association, who argued that the bill would interfere with the state’s long-term water planning process and remove needed future supply options for a fast-growing region. They said Region C faces major projected shortages by 2070, that conservation and reuse have already delayed the need for new supplies, and that reservoirs remain one tool in the state’s water-planning toolbox. TWDB staff explained the existing inter-regional conflict process and noted that the substitute would affect several unique reservoir sites, not just Marvin Nichols. After testimony, Chairman Van Deaver closed by urging passage of the bill, but the committee withdrew the substitute and left HB 2109 pending. The committee then took up House Bill 5188, a brackish groundwater bill. The author said the bill would reduce permitting burdens for wells in designated brackish groundwater production zones, and the committee substitute added requirements on monitoring, groundwater-rights ownership, and allocation of pumpage limits while removing some exclusions and export-fee provisions. Texas Wildlife Association testified against the bill, warning that the exemptions could weaken groundwater conservation districts’ ability to protect freshwater resources and surface-owner rights. San Antonio Water System testified in favor, saying brackish groundwater is a key future supply and that the substitute would help speed development of desalination and brackish projects. The Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts testified neutrally but raised concerns about reduced district oversight, especially around injection-well exclusions and the loss of export fees, and said discussions on the bill were ongoing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we're looking at groundwater sources.
• for groundwater wells that are located within a brackish groundwater production area designated by the
• The committee substitute requires that groundwater conservation districts (GCDs) within brackish groundwater
• Groundwater Conservation District rules.
• We support brackish groundwater project initiatives and protecting our fresh groundwater supplies for

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Transcript Highlights:

• Secondly, the groundwater moves, groundwater movement, pumping from inside and outside the district pulls
• this groundwater from even as far as College Station and Bryan.
• In closing, it is of utmost importance to our groundwater this that groundwater resources be protected
• Surface water contaminants getting into the groundwater.
• For North Texas Groundwater Conservation District.

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm a groundwater engineer. I've worked around Texas for over 30 years on groundwater issues.
• Groundwater conservation districts.
• Boone Pickens planned to export groundwater out of the Panhandle, because the Panhandle Groundwater Conservation
• To be in a groundwater district, but not the defense. of the Groundwater Conservation District.
• I mean, it's the groundwater district's job to monitor that groundwater.

Bills: HB24, HB27, HB24, HB27

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management, 997, house, all

Bills: SB133, SB133

Keywords: groundwater, permits, medical marijuana, license, Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 914, all

Bills: SB133, SB133

Keywords: groundwater, permits, medical marijuana, license, Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And they pose a high risk of groundwater contamination, since many of these cesspools are located among
• So it's important that Heala County sort of try to address the groundwater potential contamination in
• this particular... ...try to address the groundwater potential contamination.
• can introduce bacteria, including but certainly not limited to E. coli, as well as nitrates, to groundwater
• it makes the most impact, which is why we included that the remediation of cesspools be based on groundwater

Bills: HB2029, HB2030, HB2096

Keywords: water conservation, grants, infrastructure, environmental protection, sustainability, grant fund, Arizona water law, A.R.S. 49-1332, water efficiency, water reuse, education programs, public outreach, rainwater harvesting, gray water, graywater, drought-resistant landscaping, xeriscaping, turf removal, groundwater recharge, aquifer health

Summary: The House Committee on Natural Resources, Energy and Water heard three bills related to the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority (WIFA) and county wastewater issues. HB 2029 would require applicants for water conservation grant funds to provide additional information about the long-term water savings, efficiency, reliability, and intended use of grant money. WIFA testified neutral, saying most of the information is already collected under agency policy and the bill would mainly codify existing practice. The committee passed HB 2029 on a 9-1 vote. HB 2030 would remove education and research programs from the list of allowable uses for the water conservation grant fund. Supporters of the bill argued the fund should prioritize projects that put more water savings “on the ground,” while opponents said education and research can support conservation and help identify effective projects. WIFA said about 15 of 211 funded projects had some education or research component, totaling about $10.5 million and an estimated 180,000 acre-feet in savings. The committee passed HB 2030 on a 6-4 vote, with several members opposing the bill because they saw value in those projects. HB 2096 would expand WIFA funding to allow counties to receive assistance for remediating, closing, or replacing cesspools that threaten groundwater, surface water, or public health, and would let counties offer income-based assistance and report annually on the program. County and association witnesses described cesspools as an ongoing rural public health problem, especially in Gila County, and said the bill would help homeowners afford required upgrades. WIFA and ADEQ were neutral, noting the bill would clarify county authority and use existing federal revolving fund dollars; testimony also explained that current law already requires cesspools to be upgraded when discovered or when a property is remodeled. The committee passed HB 2096 unanimously, 10-0, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Groundwater Conservation District. you, Mr.
• Groundwater Conservation District.
• Representative Troxler, is the groundwater district supportive of this as well? Yes, yes.
• The Southeast Texas Groundwater Conservation District consists of four counties.
• It's estimated to be the 11th largest groundwater district in the state.

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