Print đź–¨

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

 

Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Economic Development met on May 20 to discuss a number of items. This report covers all bills discussed. The full notice can be found here; Part 1 of the video archive can be found here, and Part 2 of the video archive can be found here.

 

HB 21 (Neave et al.) – Relating to the statute of limitations applicable to a sexual harassment complaint filed with the Texas Workforce Commission

  • TWC 180 day period to make a sexual harassment claim is not in line with federal law
  • Bill aligns with federal law, extending period to 300 days

HB 21 left pending.

 

HB 619 (Thompson, Senfronia, et al.) CS – Relating to developing a strategic plan to support the child-care workforce

  • Alvarado – Direct Texas Workforce Commission to develop strategic plan to improve the early childcare workforce
  • CS – Language clarification
  • Birdwell – Difference between collecting data and weaponizing it; thank you for your support

 

Kim Kofron, Early Childhood Education for Children at Risk – For

  • Concerns with retaining quality childcare providers
  • Apprenticeships in high schools and higher education institution, need better communication

HB 619 left pending.

 

HB 1247 (Lozano et al.) CS – Relating to the development of and report on a tri-agency work-based learning strategic framework but the Texas Workforce Commission, the Texas Education Agency, and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board

  • Each institution will appoint existing staff member to oversee project
  • Improve school to work pipeline
  • CS adds requirement that the report identify available federal funds for work based training and provide recommendations on the use of those funds

 

Mike Meroney, Texas Association of Manufacturers – For

  • Support work based learning

 

Justin Yancy, Texas Business Leadership Council – For

  • Goal is to create a more globally competitive Texas
  • Vital to economy

CS HB 1247 left pending.

 

HB 1501 (Dean) –  Relating to certain regulations adopted by a governmental entity restricting the use of a natural gas or propane appliance or other system or component

  • Birdwell – Bill is about protecting consumer energy choices similar to what we did in SB 17
  • Legislation simply precludes local governments from adopting a policy that prohibits natural gas or propane appliances
  • CS – Aligns with the language in SB 17 (recently signed into law by Gov. Abbott), bill compliments SB 17(protected the utility service hookup), HB 1501 protects the appliances that are hooked up to that utility service

 

Cyrus Reed, Lone Star Chapter Sierra Club – Against

  • Haven’t seen the CS
  • Concerned with the usage of the word “indirect” in the language of the bill and whether that might be interpreted to mean cities couldn’t continue to do good things on codes or having incentives for heat pumps that don’t use gas, etc
  • Suggests removing the word “indirect” or adding language making it clear what political subdivisions can do; open to talk later about it, if not, would like to get conversation on the Senate floor to make it clear cities are not being stopped from doing things that are good for consumers
  • Birdwell – Do not know if we can work the language addition/removal tonight (last night) at a committee vote level, but I respect what you are asking and by all means visit with my team

HB 1501 left pending

 

HB 1520 (Paddie) – Relating to the recovery and securitization of certain extraordinary costs incurred by certain gas utilities; providing authority to issue bonds and impose fees and assessments

  • Hancock – Bill Addresses the financial lingering effects of the February winter storm
  • Grants Railroad commission statutory authority to use securitization and the issuance of bonds for extraordinary costs associated with the winter storm to spread the payment out over a longer period of time
  • CS – Addresses operational issues raised by Texas Public Financing Authority regarding the issuance and administration of rate relief bonds
  • More clearly defines each agency’s role in the implementation, CS limits the scope of the bill to only extraordinary costs incurred during the winter storm
  • Includes study that asks the railroad commission to consider the advantages and disadvantages of spot market gas purchases during a catastrophic weather event that may contribute to volatile customer rates
  • Kolkhorst – I have some MOUs that have begun to pass these extraordinary costs onto their customers, how will they be effected by this?
  • It would be up to them and whether they want to take advantage of this, as long as they can show these were gas prices that occurred during the winter storm then this provides that mechanism to finance those to reduce those costs and spread them out over a longer period of time
  • Kolkhorst – So ultimately the railroads commission will issue bonds, right? Who pays those bonds off?
  • Correct; the people who are using that as access to spread out these costs over a longer period of time
  • Kolkhorst – Railroad commission has 90 days to review the billions of gas costs and funds, correct? Noticed in Kansas and Oklahoma they are up to 108 days, is 90 days enough?
  • Correct; and I mean we haven’t been told that it’s not from the parties involved
  • Kolkhorst – Where are we with CPS and their lawsuit against gas suppliers, and what’s going out there with things like this (price gouging)?
  • That is a completely other issue
  • Happy to report that the co-op securitization is on major state in the House
  • Kolkhorst – Majority of concerns that I get from my constituents is on the gas side
  • Right, because many of those bills got passed along

 

Brent Bishop, CoServ Gas, Ltd – For

  • Bill will be very important for consumers and gas companies across Texas
  • In our tariffs, the normal manner of the average impact per consumer of these extraordinary cost would be extremely significant, no additional markup
  • Selinger – What were the extraordinary costs? The additional costs that you paid?
  • Approximately $70 million, about 2 years worth of gas costs
  • Selinger – When you say there was no additional markup other than your regular markup to your customers, is that audited in any fashion by the railroad commission or anyone else when you make a claim?
  • Yes, they review this. It’s a separate line item on the bill
  • Selinger – Will it be a line-item base just on those additional costs caused by Uri?
  • I believe so, if I read it correctly

 

David Billinger, Self and EPCOR – For

  • Explains the financial burden caused by Uri, 400 fold increase in price; was still able to maintain service for 99.9% of our constituents
  • This bill will benefit LDC natural gas customers, ae have not passed any financial burden on to customers
  • Selinger – How much more did you pay for natural gas during February this year than a February of a typical year?
  • Previous year was around $3 in MCF; peak price this year was $400 (Houston) per SEF
  • Selinger – How many billions of cubic feet do you use a year?
  • It’s $300 million
  • Kolkhorst – If you haven’t passed on any of your severe financial burden, how are you paying your bills and what are your suppliers saying to you?

We’ve paid all of our bills

  • Kolkhorst – Have you done that through securitizing loans or you just had that much cash laying around?
  • Through our parent company providing a bridge loan for the business

 

Cyrus Reed, Lone Star Chapter Sierra Club – For

  • Has not seen the CS
  • Concerned with language of “and save customers money by financing extraordinary costs with bonds that carry an interest rate that is lower than the utility’s cost of capital”
  • LBB is assuming a pretty high interest, hoping if we do that we’re not actually carrying that high of an interest rate because that’s going to hurt consumers
  • People should be able to intervene in any financing orders to make sure costs are kept low
  • Volumes of gas, gas conservation programs; hasn’t seen CS but is told this aligns with it

 

Kenneth Flippin, US Green Building Council Texas Chapter – On

  • Securitization is a good idea
  • More consumer protection should be on the bill
  • Has not seen the CS

 

Daniel Pope, SiEnergy, LP – For

  • Great financial benefit to our customers
  • Our gas costs in February were 3x our expected gas costs for the entire year of 2021

 

Conrad Gruber, Atmos Energy Corporation – For

  • Here to advocate on behalf of our customers
  • Securitization is the most effective and best way to spread the costs for the customers
  • Explains the benefits of securitization
  • Kolkhorst – One testimony said their prices spiked at 400-fold, what did y’all see?
  • Around 100-fold, a little bit less
  • Kolkhorst – Did y’all have to secure other suppliers or did your normal suppliers suffice?
  • To be brief, yes; had to make provisions for supply as supply was cut off
  • Kolkhorst – Are any of your suppliers the same as Vistra’s or CPS?
  • I don’t know specifically, but I’d assume there are some
  • Kolkhorst – Have you passed any of the costs onto your consumers yet, how are you handling the financial burden?
  • We have paid the suppliers and we have not passed the costs on to any consumers; we finance this cost on an interim basis and have yet to pass it on

 

Jason Ryan, CenterPoint Energy – For

  • Probably the only company here that has done securitization before; historically, our consumers have saved our consumers roughly $2 billion
  • Provision in the bill that would require us to pass any of those refunded dollars back to customers
  • Hancock – Speaks highly of CenterPoint Energy
  • We think the sooner we do securitization, the more affordable the “paying back” will be and the sooner we can return costs to our customers
  • Kolkhorst – I really, really, really like this approach, and I also think it will take several years to fully recover
  • Selinger – Over a long period of time, your customers are still going to pay more money and you’ll have a lot of expensive litigation, but there is a reasonable assumption this can happen again. What do you do to lessen the effect the next time it’s going to happen?
  • Agreed, agreed. We will surely look back at our strategy for gas supply, but it will not be resolved tonight. There should be a robust discussion over it
  • Selinger – To what degree was your supply lessened by the effects of at least in the Permian Basin? There was a curtailment of electricity on the grid, how much volume did that cost you?
  • We did not see the spike in natural gas prices because of power outages, we saw the spike Friday the 12th of February

HB 1520 left pending.

 

HB 2136 (Thompson) – Relating to the marine vessel projects in the diesel emissions reduction incentive program

  • Alvarado – Marine vessels must operate at at least 75% of the time an intercostal waterway or bays adjacent to non-attainment areas or affected counties in Texas
  • As a result, marine vessels are forced to operate only in limited geographic regions in Texas or avoid participation in TERP program
  • Bill will allow marine vessels to be operated at least 55% of the time an intercostal waterway or bays adjacent to non-attainment areas or affected counties in Texas to be eligible for a TERP grant

HB 2136 left pending.

 

HB 2172 (Morales) CS – Relating to the hotel occupancy tax imposed by certain counties and the use of revenue from that tax; reducing the maximum rate of that tax; authorizing the imposition of a tax

  • Charge 2% hotel occupancy tax; tax will go towards Maverick County Airport
  • CS – Remove the amendment added on the House floor which bracketed this bill to Denton County; all interested parties have agreed to remove bracket

HB 2172 left pending.

 

HB 2209 (King) – Relating to the use of municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue by certain municipalities

  • Expands the authority to Carrizo Springs
  • Intend to use funds for the construction and maintenance of a sports facility

HB 2209 left pending.

 

HB 2345 (Zwiener) – Relating to the authority of certain counties to impose a hotel occupancy tax

  • Allows Blanco county the ability to pose up to a 7% hotel occupancy tax to be used for the promotion of tourism
  • Promoting dark skies
  • Bill would provide parity on the county and city level

HB 2345 left pending.

 

HB 2361 (Landgraf et al.) – Relating to the new technology implementation grant program administered by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

  • The current statute is not up to date with advancements in technology and does not address flaring
  • Amends NTIG program to include projects that reduce flaring emissions
  • Removes grant eligibility requirement that mandates reduction in flaring emissions
  • Allows for the installation of systems that reduce flaring and other site emissions

 

Cyrus Reed, Lone Star Chapter of Sierra Club – For

  • We lose a lot of gas into the atmosphere because of flaring or fugitive emissions
  • Spending a portion of our money on flare ups can reduce the impact to people and regulate gas emissions to slow global warming

HB 2361 left pending.

 

HB 2607 (Talarico) – Relating to the powers and duties of the Texas Workforce Commission and local workforce development boards regarding the provision of childcare and the subsidized child care program

  • Kolkhorst – Requires state subsidized childcare providers to participate in the Texas Rising Star Program
  • Bill is needed because Texas currently spends hundreds of millions of dollars per year to provide childcare for low income working families, will increase quality and will provide oversight over state funds
  • CS – Enables a 36-month program waiver for childcare providers, was supped to be an amendment but didn’t quite get there

 

Kim Kofron, Early Childhood Education – For

  • Roughly 70% of our children are in programs without access to high quality programs and without accountability for this federal funding
  • Bill would require providers who make the decision to care for children in the subsidized program to be held accountable for participating in the Texas Rising Star Program, our measure of quality and accountability in Texas
  • Bill is not a government mandate and does not expand eligibility
  • Requires subsidized providers to be Texas Rising Star certified that was laid out by Kolkhorst
  • Kolkhorst – Have our child providers come back, are we still in a bad spot?
  • We’re making our way back with TWC’s funding
  • Kolkhorst – Why are so many people not participating in the program?
  • Good question, mostly because it’s voluntary; a level pf accountability they don’t have to have at the moment
  • Kolkhorst – Concern about the bill, childcare is a recovering industry and so making them go into this, will that create less capacity again?
  • I think the 5-year plan with the additional 36 month plan on top of that is something TWC is cautious and aware of

HB 2607 left pending.

 

HB 2708 (Paxton) – Relating to the use of certain fees deposited to the hazardous and solid waste remediation fee account for reimbursement of environmental remediation at certain former battery recycling facility sites

  • Bill amends the Health and Safety Code to authorize the use of money in the hazardous and solid waste remediation fee account
  • Bill is bracketed to the City of Frisco, provisions for funding eligibility for the city to request funds for remediation of the site expire on September 1, 2027
  • Conference committee report on SB 1 includes a contingency rider for $3 million for HB 2708

 

George Purefoy, City of Frisco – For

  • Explains the bankruptcy of the plant (2013) there and the complications that led them there
  • TCEQ offered a $25 million performance bond, declared liquidation bankruptcy before receiving this bond; TCEQ eventually took ever the entire plant
  • Believes the final clean up cost will be in excess of $30 million, currently paying a $1 million – $1.5 million a year for operation costs

HB 2708 left pending.

 

HB 3097 (Stephenson et al.) CS – Relating to entitlement of certain municipalities to receive tax revenue from certain establishments located near a hotel and convention center project

  • Extend the deadline and clarify the definition of “commences” for qualifying projects
  • CS – Makes technical changes

HB 3097 left pending.

 

HB 3217 (Harris) – Relating to the authority of certain counties to impose a hotel occupancy tax and the use of revenue from that tax

  • Will allow Anderson County to levy a hotel occupancy tax to help the county renovate the civics center in Palestine

HB 3217 left pending.

 

HB 3257 (King et al.) – Relating to the creation of the Texas Holocaust, Genocide, and Antisemitism Advisory Commission

  • Replaces Texas Holocaust and Genocide Commission
  • Commission is comprised of nine members appointed by governor, serving six staggered terms
  • Formally adopts definition of antisemitism

 

Randall Czarlinsky, American Jewish Committee Houston Region – For

  • Definition of antisemitism is internationally accepted

HB 3257 left pending.

 

HB 3416 (Darby) – Relating to disclosures regarding indemnification obligations and insurance coverage in connection with provision of services pertaining to wells or mines by certain subcontractors

  • Identical House companion to SB 1599 (Lucio)
  • Requires a temporary placement service to give a notice to the uniquely skilled workers of oil and gas of their liability coverage and indemnification options

HB 3416 left pending.

 

HB 3584 (Murr et al.) – Relating to monuments, markers, medallions, and antiques controlled by or in the custody of the Texas Historical Commission; authorizing civil penalties

  • Historical markers and medallions cannot be removed or concealed on public or private land without the agency’s permission
  • Bill does not increase fines but clarifies that each day of violation may be considered a separate violation
  • Seliger – Why do landowners not have the right to decide what is on their property?
    • They can file to have it removed
  • Seliger – And if the agency says no?

 

Mark Wolfe, Texas Historical Commission – Resource

  • Seliger – This could constitute a taking if I do not want this on my property
    • These markers are placed, typically, at the request of the property owner, typically by roadways

HB 3584 left pending.

 

HB 3682 (Perez) – Relating to the use of municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue by certain municipalities

  • Allows Baytown to use hotel occupancy tax to update existing sports facilities or fields

 

Thomas Reeves, City of Baytown – For

  • Happy to support bill, our hotels gladly support as well

HB 3682 left pending.

 

HB 3938 (Bell et al.) CS – Relating to the establishment of the industry-based certification advisory council and the transfer of certain duties to that advisory council

  • Transfer the development of industry-based certification from TEA to a newly created advisory council
  • Improve process for reviewing and processing certification with more extensive stakeholder input
  • Advisory council be comprised of nine members, representing different career sectors and education institutions
  • Council will annually develop and review an inventory of the industry recognized certifications
  • Inventory will be provided with each school district and higher education institution
  • Creating independent process, ensuring up to date alignment with education and workforce

 

Erin Valdez, Texas Public Policy Foundation – For

  • Stakeholder interest on IBC list is crucial for accountability and outcome based bonus program
  • IBCs: while good, only about 18% earned by K12 students have any actual demand by employers, keep in mind
  • Outcome based funding should contain some element of post graduation wages to gauge real world impact

 

Mike Meroney, Texas Association of Manufacturers – For

  • IBC list is a barrier to CTE courses and industry certifications
  • We need extra context from stakeholders and two year universities

HB 3938 left pending.

 

HB 4056 (Meza et al.) – Relating to the establishment of a committee to study the formation of a Texas Bicentennial Commission

  • Important to start planning the bicentennial celebrate of Texas
  • Will create a diverse, 77 member committee; 2 nominees from each senatorial district
  • General Land Office and Texas Historical Commission will provide administrative committee and report no later than December 2022

 

Randy Lee, Self – For

  • We want everyone to participate, every county
  • Recollection of the history of Texas celebration
  • Seliger – Anything you learned from the last centennial that you want to avoid?
    • Needed official sanction to use the logo
  • Seliger – We have fifteen years; what is the biggest challenge between now and then?
    • Figuring out the where and how; centralized location? Or throughout the state?

HB 4056 left pending.

 

HB 4103 (Burrows) CS – Relating to the authority of certain municipalities to receiver certain tax revenue derived from certain establishments related to a hotel and convention center project and to pledge certain tax revenue for the payment of obligations related to the project

  • Birdwell – Seeks to include multiple municipalities in eligibility for hotel and convention center projects and the associated rebate on state taxes
  • Amends requirements for occupancy tax
  • CS narrows scope of the bill from the House and clarifies language
  • CS qualifies specific cities for eligibility
  • Removes requirement that a sports field or facility must be used at least 10 times for district, state, regional, or national sports tournaments to be able to use a municipal hotel occupancy tax
  • Exemption applies only to Queens city

 

Justin Bragiel, Texas Hotel and Lodging Association – For

  • In favor of CS, but one regret is that it removes some house amendments that would have allowed the existing convention center hotel projects to qualify for an additional 2 years of rebates due to the impact of the pandemic
  • Would appreciate getting additional systems for struggling hotel projects and cities across Texas

 

Thomas Gwondz, City of Victoria – For

  • Bill will help us expand our community

HB 4103 left pending.

 

HB 4110 (Leach et al.) CS – Relating to the regulation of metal recycling; increasing a criminal penalty

  • CS strengthens the regulation of the sale of catalytic converters to metal recycling entities to combat a nationwide spike in theft
  • Theft of catalytic converters has increased 1200% over last two years, Texas is one of the top five states for this kind of theft
  • Metal recyclers have no ability to prevent theft and are often complicit in the purchase and sale of the stolen converters
  • Bill increases record keeping requirements for all transactions of converters
  • Implements five day hold period before converters can be sold or disposed
  • Requires recycle entities to mark each converter purchase with a unique number
  • CS defines catalytic converter
  • CS removes $25 cap on the sale of regulated metals to address concerns of stakeholders
  • Seliger – In identifying “all parts connected to a catalytic converter”, does that mean the entire exhaust system of a car?
    • Refer to witness

 

Laird Doran, Gulf States Toyota – Resource

  • This bill is more so about the precious metals inside of the converters
  • Seliger – If someone took the platinum out of the converter, tried to sell it, we documented it as stated in the bill, would that realize the goal of this bill?
    • To my understanding
  • People typically get under the car and saw away at the converter
  • Seliger – The bill states “all parts connected to a catalytic converter”, which we can assume means the entire exhaust system
  • Seliger – Bill requires thumbprint for all metal sales? How does that strike you?
    • Better question for law enforcement
  • Seliger – Is it paper and ink thumbprint? Electronic?
    • Unaware
  • Seliger – I think this a pointless bill. Big government for no reason
  • Alvarado – In light of the increase of theft, how should we address this?
  • Selinger – The way that we address all thefts, one of the things this bill doesn’t take into account is whether if someone bringing in a starter, should they be their thumbprint or unique number because it has copper in it? Don’t think this does what it’s intended to do
  • This bill targets situations and materials to halt theft of converters specifically

 

Laird Doran, Gulf States Toyota – For

  • A stolen converter can sell for $600-750, but the replacement cost is much higher
  • We have seen an 832% increase in replacement catalytic converters compared to this time last year
  • Platinum, palladium and rhodium; rhodium alone sells for $28,000 an ounce
  • The cheapest replacement I have seen cost $3500
  • Seliger – Have any arrests been made or any converters recovered?
    • Not aware
  • Seliger – Are there precious metals inside the converter? And do those components have a unique serial number?
    • Yes, components contain the metal
    • Converter itself has a number, but the materials do not
  • The bill is trying to impose more safeguards; when someone is bringing these materials in to a metal recycler, there will be more accountability in identification and other requirements
  • Alvarado – Anyone can sell multiple converters at one time without being asked where they came from
  • Seliger – It would make more sense for the manufacturer distributor to put a serial number on the precious metal components of the converter for each car, track like a weapon?
    • When a converter is manufactured, it could end up in any number of geographic regions
    • If it is a predetermined serial number, it would be problematic
    • Unaware of any plant operation that has a stamping mechanism
  • Birdwell – If there were a serial number, it would still be possible to disassemble it and sell it for parts

 

Brian Redburn, Irving Police Department – For

  • The current recycling regulations are woefully insufficient; stolen devices are routinely sold without having to identify the vehicle or proof of ownership interest
  • 1600% increase in this crime in Irving in two years
  • Seliger – If converters had a serial number, would it make it easier to find the thieves and victims?
    • Would be helpful for US Congress to investigate so there is uniformity, but what about the tens of millions of cars already on the road
    • We should do both
  • We can prove and arrest less than 10% of culprits
  • Seliger – Sounds like insufficient security at the dealerships
  • Current regulations permit transactions under suspicious circumstances under which no reasonable person would believe they were acquired legitimately
  • Not the fault of the recyclers, but the regulations, and we should bolster the questioning process
  • Birdwell – Who is giving the money to the thieves?
    • Recyclers typically buy them, hand over a check, and ship them to another recycler to separate the metals
  • Birdwell – We do not want to overburden the righteous recyclers while also disincentivizing the bad operators
  • CS provides language to include parts inside of the catalytic converter

 

John Pitts, Recycling Council of Texas – On

  • Supportive of intent, but there are sections of this bill that are not productive and burden non-catalytic converter sales
  • We are thorough, though there are identifying actions that could be taken in Section 1 and 2 of the bill that would be beneficial for tracking purposes
  • Our recyclers do not have the ability or technology to separate the metals in the converter, that happens down stream
  • This bill requires thumbprints on all metal transactions; that is already a requirement for most metal transactions and it stays on record
    • The constant printing and picture taking would be burdensome and expensive
  • Cash card in bill is not relevant to catalytic converter
  • You can buy converters on Facebook marketplace; would like to see these regulations on all sales of converters and not MREs alone
  • When our employees see an absurd number of converters being sold, we inform law enforcement – we want to be apart of the solution
  • We believe the bill would push more sales into the black market, which is harder to track and control
  • Birdwell – What is the hardest thing to comply with as the bill is written?
    • The added photography; would require overhaul of our system which is costly and pushes customers into the black market
  • Converters come to us whole and leave our plants whole
  • The recyclers down stream are not regulated like we are and are not covered in the bill
  • DPS has a Metal Theft Advisory Committee, would be a good resource

HB 4110 left pending.

 

HB 4279 (Dominguez) – Relating to the eligibility of the Windham School District to participate in the Jobs and Education for Texans (JET) Grant Program

  • Amends the education code to include the Windham School District among eligible school districts that apply for JET grants

HB 4279 left pending.

 

HB 4305 (Morales, et al) CS – Relating the use of hotel occupancy tax revenue by certain municipalities and counties

  • Bill would add municipalities in Presidio and Jeff Davis counties to existing statute that authorizes the use of hotel occupancy taxes for the preservation of dark skies
  • CS removes subsection C and E in section 1, 2, and 3
  • CS changes language for the city of Brownsville
  • Seliger – Are there any compensation measures in the bill for hotels to catch up from the revenue decrease from COVID?
    • Not advised

 

Chloe Crumley, National Parks Conservation Association – For

  • Provides communities with funding option to help keep night sky attractive

HB 4305 left pending.

 

HB 4472 (Landgraf et al.) – Relating to the Texas emissions reduction plan

  • Birdwell – Makes a number of programmatic funding changes, numerous additions to the program, multiple amendments on the House floor
  • CS – Prunes down HB 4472 to only include language that is only similar to what this committee passed out as SB 1263
  • Takes the bill back to its original language with just a few changes, SB 1263 also brought TxDot to the table
  • Any funds not used by TCEQ for TERP within the biennium was also sent to Fund 6 for the SEEMAC project
  • CS also makes the following changes to SB 73 that is within this bill:
  • Changes the percentage of TERP funds sent to Fund 6 for SEEMAC projects from 40% to not less than 35%
  • 35% transfer to Fund 6 is now located in a different section of the bill
  • Adds effected counties to the counties eligible for SEEMAC projects, makes it so both “nonattainment” and “near nonattainment” can receive SEEMAC funds
  • Adds HB 2136 and HB 2361 as part of it as an additional mechanism for those bills to get to the governor’s desk

 

Cyrus Reed, Lone Star Chapter Sierra Club – On

  • We would like to see the Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Program at SiCo that was in the original HB 4472, would like to see that part of the bill in the House to be back in this bill
  • We believe 20% would be a better level opposed to 35%

 

Sam Gammage, Texas Chemical Council – For

  • Believes the air monitoring capability language should remain in the bill along with “fee based” contract language

 

Kenneth Flippin, US Green Building Council Texas Chapter – Against

  • We support the weatherization of homes through this program, explains the benefits of weatherization; if this can be added back into the bill we will gladly support it

HB 4472 left pending.