2025 Texas sessionsRegular and both called sessions have ended. This index covers House and Senate bills, not resolutions. Statuses come from official reports.

2025 · Regular session · House bill

HB912

HB912 allows the Public Utility Commission (PUC) to approve an alternative to the existing compensation method for qualifying customer-generated electricity under Utilities Code 39.554.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to the compensation of a distributed renewable generation owner in certain areas outside of ERCOT.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists House author(s): Moody. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.

Report an error ↗

Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.

Bill highlights

Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.

HB912 allows the Public Utility Commission (PUC) to approve an alternative to the existing compensation method for qualifying customer-generated electricity under Utilities Code 39.554.
This is not a statewide solar-buyback mandate or a statewide repeal of net metering.
The changed provision concerns owners choosing the qualifying single-meter arrangement under Section 39.554(e).
Unless the PUC approves an alternative, the existing method remains: generation offsets consumption within the billing period, and excess generation is credited under subsection (g).
HB912 took effect September 1, 2026, a year later than the date in the original proposal.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

HB912 allows the Public Utility Commission (PUC) to approve an alternative to the existing compensation method for qualifying customer-generated electricity under Utilities Code 39.554. Before approving an alternative, the PUC must require the utility to submit a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis using established best practices to justify compensation rates and associated fees. The commission must consider that analysis before approving alternative rates or continuing net metering, including rates or fees that apply only to distributed-generation owners and reflect the generation’s value. Final law

This is not a statewide solar-buyback mandate or a statewide repeal of net metering. The governing subchapter applies only to an investor-owned utility operating solely outside ERCOT in Texas areas that were in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council on January 1, 2011, not affiliated with ERCOT on that date, and outside the three other specified subchapters. Geographic and utility limits

The changed provision concerns owners choosing the qualifying single-meter arrangement under Section 39.554(e). Existing eligibility is limited to specified low-income-elderly apartment housing with sufficient expected generation, or a qualifying facility of no more than 50 kilowatts, along with the section’s generation-versus-consumption limits. It is not an unconditional entitlement for every generating customer.

Unless the PUC approves an alternative, the existing method remains: generation offsets consumption within the billing period, and excess generation is credited under subsection (g). That existing subsection requires surplus purchases at the utility’s cost as determined by PUC rule, with specified credit carry-forward and refund rules—not an automatic promise to pay full retail price for every surplus kilowatt-hour. Existing metering and compensation framework

HB912 took effect September 1, 2026, a year later than the date in the original proposal. It authorizes a PUC decision-making process; it does not itself set a new cents-per-kilowatt-hour rate or establish that a particular alternative tariff has been approved. Official history

What changed along the way?

The introduced bill and House committee report allowed PUC-approved alternative compensation but did not require the cost-benefit analysis. They proposed a September 1, 2025 effective date.

The House adopted Moody’s amendment on April 8, adding the comprehensive-analysis requirement and moving the effective date to 2026. The engrossed, Senate committee and final texts retained those changes without further revision. The amendment index lists that one adopted amendment; there was no conference rewrite. The governor signed May 20, 2025.

For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.

Official bill versions

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?

Eligible generation owners and other utility customers may benefit from a compensation decision supported by an explicit analysis of costs and value. The required analysis does not guarantee that an owner’s payment rate will rise, remain unchanged or fall.

The utility must prepare the analysis, and the PUC must evaluate it. Owners’ returns on generation investments and allocation of utility costs may depend on later approved rates and fees. HB912 itself does not quantify those effects or directly change an individual customer’s bill.

The latest fiscal note anticipated no significant state or local-government fiscal impact, assuming costs could be absorbed using existing resources. That governmental estimate is not a finding of zero financial effect on utility customers or generation owners.

Official sources

Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.