SB1055

The introduced, Senate committee, engrossed, House committee and enrolled versions have the same operative provisions: replace the 1-cent ceiling with 7 cents and provide an effective-date rule. The one indexed House second-reading amendment, offered by Isaac, proposed replacing the ceiling with a fee equal or as similar as possible, by rate or total amount, to an equivalent fee charged by the Hays Trinity Groundwater Conservation District. The history records that amendment as withdrawn on May 27. The final law does not tie Southeast Texas’s fee to Hays Trinity’s fees. Text versions; Amendment index; Withdrawn amendment text; Disposition history; Final law.

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

The district gains room to raise fee revenue; owners or operators of covered permitted wells could pay more if the district uses that authority. For scale, applying the old and new ceilings to 1 million gallons gives $10 and $70 respectively—a $60 difference and a sevenfold ceiling. That is an illustration of the statutory limits, not a report of the district’s adopted rate or an individual bill. Exempt wells are not brought into the permit-fee provision merely by this change. Final law; Existing district law 8868.153.

The April 11 fiscal note anticipates no fiscal implication for the state and says an increase in the permit fee would produce revenue for the district. It provides no dollar estimate of that revenue or quantified conservation benefit. The act does not itself guarantee reduced pumping, improved aquifer conditions or a particular spending program. Fiscal note; Final law.