Recently-filed SB 2627 (Schwertner) and SJR 93 (Schwertner), related to the creation of the Texas Energy Fund, passed out of the Senate (27-4) with amendments on 5/4. The bill and its corresponding resolution will now move to the House for further consideration.
A HillCo report covering the floor discussion can be found below.
This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight 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.
Senate Floor 5-4-2023
SB 2627 (Schwertner) Relating to funding mechanisms to support the construction, maintenance, and modernization of dispatchable electric generating facilities
- Schwertner – Creation of the Texas energy fund
- Have a substantive amendment that will:
- Raise minimum qualifying generation capacity 10 MW to 100 MW
- Changes consideration of who could be considered for these grants; credit worthiness, flexibility of PUC to alter requirements as needed
- Limit facilities to industrial loads and private use
- Caps completion bonus to $200k per MW; maximum would be about $20m
- Partitions money related to maintenance and new build
- Lowers escrow from 5% to 3%
- Sets a Sunset of December 1, 2028
- Bettencourt and Schwertner discuss the energy needs of the state
- Schwertner – Need to incentivize the build of new generation to balance out wind/solar
- Bettencourt – This bill is necessary to meet the needs of the state; hopes this goes through the House to the Governor’s desk
- Schwertner – Are other bills that address other energy concerns, this is about new build
- FA 1 Schwertner – Long amendment laid out earlier
- Menendez – Asks about the amendment
- Adds guardrails about what portion can be used for construction/maintenance
- Menendez – Appreciate the $200k cap per MW
- FA 1 adopted
- Menendez – Asks about the amendment
- FA 2 Schwertner – Currently is $500m for maintenance and upkeep; allows that section to be allowed for fuel transportation infrastructure
- Johnson – Intention is to add a financial option for a generator who finds themselves in monopolistic situation; not a statement/command they do this?
- Correct
- Johnson – Not representing to people that we have done a fiscal analysis on building a new pipeline; is a tool that would be used in the discretion of the generator/PUC?
- Correct
- FA 2 adopted
- Johnson – Intention is to add a financial option for a generator who finds themselves in monopolistic situation; not a statement/command they do this?
- FA 3 Menendez – If we have unused dollars, could possibly, after sunset date, could put toward demand response and energy efficiency programs
- Schwertner – Are worthwhile goals, once over, funds should go back to the taxpayers; against amendment
- Menendez and Eckhardt discuss demand response and energy efficiency programs
- FA 3 fails (12-19)
- SB 2627 finally passes (27-4)
SJR 93 (Schwertner) Proposing a constitutional amendment providing for the creation of the Texas energy fund and the authorization of other funding mechanisms to support the construction, maintenance, and modernization
- Schwertner – Funding mechanism for SB 2627
- FA 1 Schwertner – Fund management language; authorizes unused funds to be returned to the treasury
- FA 1 adopted
- SJR 93 finally passes (27-4)