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: 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:

• and in the management of groundwater by those groundwater districts.
• House Bill 1689 was filed to enhance how groundwater conservation districts can use certain export fee
• Currently, GCDs may collect export fees on groundwater transported outside their boundaries, but the
• export development.
• 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:

• and the management of groundwater. or by those groundwater districts.
• Bill 1689 was filed to enhance how groundwater conservation districts can use certain export fee revenues
• Currently, GCDs may collect export fees on groundwater transported outside their boundaries, but the
• export development.
• I will say this: the export fee we got in before, and the export fee 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

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll rely on groundwater for this water supply.
• I'm the general manager of the Upper Trinity Groundwater Conservation District.
• We are ground zero for groundwater wells being drilled.
• In other words, just to cut to the quick of it, a lot of groundwater being used.
• support essential infrastructure tied to groundwater conservation and district operations.

Bills: SB 612, SB 1855, SB 2568, SB 3058

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:

• If it's groundwater versus surface water, the groundwater is going to have more pollutants in it naturally
• continue to be a problem and it's even more exacerbated with the drought because if you're getting groundwater

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:

• groundwater from our district to large cities.
• are to groundwater resources.
• We represent 91 of the 98 groundwater conservation districts.
• It's a massive taking of groundwater.
• Yet, groundwater conservation districts cannot directly deny groundwater production; they can only...

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:

• Groundwater versus surface water; the groundwater is going to have more pollutants in it naturally occurring
• continue to be a problem, and it's even more exacerbated with the drought because if you're getting groundwater

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:

• 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

Transcript Highlights:

• evidence of groundwater availability in the vicinity of the proposed subdivision.
• I'm the General Manager of the Upper Trinity Groundwater Conservation District.
• That kicked off the requirement for the groundwater study, right?
• On groundwater wells for their daily water usage.
• In other words, just to cut to the quick of it, a lot of groundwater is being used.

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:

• and obstruct U.S. exports, and other foreign economic policies.
• We have zero exports of the fresh and frozen U.S. pork to Australia.
• I think it's every $15 they export to us, we send them, you know, $1.
• This is the largest beef export market in the world. is now China.
• March exports of beef to China, U.S. beef, declined 92 percent.

Keywords: tariffs, Trump administration, economy, public testimony, trade policy, market access, export controls

Summary: The meeting focused on various significant topics concerning the recent tariff policies and their wide-ranging implications on the American economy. Members expressed their concerns regarding the negative impact of increased tariffs as proposed by the Trump administration, with specific emphasis on how families might suffer from higher costs and market access issues. The discussion was lively, with members questioning the clarity of the tariff plan and raising concerns about its potential effects on small businesses and American exports.

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:

• Members, as you're well aware from our hearing on July 15th, there is a large-volume groundwater export
• pumping and these large-volume export proposals, as well as to determine the amount of groundwater that
• So, well over the modeled available groundwater, exporting out.
• So, well over the modeled available groundwater, exporting out.
• Boone Pickens planned to export groundwater out of the Panhandle, because the Panhandle Groundwater Conservation

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
• Lastly, the committee substitute prohibits a groundwater conservation district from collecting export
• We support brackish groundwater project initiatives and protecting our fresh groundwater supplies for
• project using the brackish groundwater.

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:

• 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.
• The committee substitute prohibits a groundwater conservation district from collecting export fees for
• 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:

• pumping and these large volume export proposals, as well as to determine the amount of groundwater that
• Over the modeled available groundwater, exporting out.
• Specific to groundwater export and large production permits, they are very complex policy proposals.
• It's the reason our county leaders adopted policy many years ago that supports limiting groundwater exports
• Boone Pickens planned to export groundwater out of the Panhandle, because the Panhandle Groundwater Conservation

Bills: HB24, HB27, HB24, HB27

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