BILL ANALYSIS



C.S.H.B. 2875
By: Johnson
4-3-95
Committee Report (Substituted)


BACKGROUND
Counties that apply for funding through the Economically Distressed
Areas Program (EDAP) are experiencing a quandary.  Once they
receive facility planning funds, they may have approximately nine
months to apply for construction funding before a new eligibility
list is issued.  But, if the construction application is submitted
by an applicant in a non-border county after the statistics have
been released, and they show an economic improvement in that county
during the previous year, the applicant could lose its eligibility
for construction funding even though it had already received
facility planning funds.  Because eligibility for non-border
counties is based on an annual review of income and unemployment
information, eligibility may vary from year to year.

The economic improvements that render a county ineligible for
construction funding may represent a relatively minor shift in
economics (i.e., not enough to enable the applicant to fund the
construction without financial assistance).  Moreover, if the
county no longer qualifies for construction funds, the public
health threat caused by inadequate water and/or wastewater
facilities will continue to exist.

PURPOSE
To allow counties to continue to receive EDAP funds for individual
projects in progress even if their economic situation improves
above the stated requirements.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly
grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer,
department, agency, or institution.

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS
SECTION 1. Amends Section 15.407, Water Code, by adding Subsection
(g) which provides that if a county's average per capita income
increases or the unemployment decreases, a project in progress
still remains eligible for the funds under this section.

SECTION 2. Amends Section 17.926, Water Code, to provide that both
applications under this subchapter and applications for funds under
Section 15.407 fall under the "applicant's continued eligibility"
provisions.

SECTION 3.  Outlines the provisions for which Section 15.407 (g)
and Section 17.926 applies.

SECTION 4.  Emergency clause. 



COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE
At Section 3, page 2, line 12, of the Substitute, the word "or" at
the end of the line was the word "and" in the Introduced version of
the bill.

SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION
H.B.2875 was considered by the committee in a public hearing on
April 3, 1995.
The following persons testified in favor of the bill: None (0).
The following persons testified against the bill: None (0).
The following person testified on the bill:
     Mr. Fernando Escarcega, representing Texas Water Development
Board.
The committee considered a complete substitute for the bill.  The
substitute was adopted without objection.
The bill was reported favorably as substituted, with the
recommendation that it do pass and be printed and be sent to the
Committee on Local and Consent Calendars, by a record vote of 7
ayes, 0 nays, 0 pnv, 2 absent.