BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.S.B. 1842 |
By: Lucio |
Natural Resources |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties contend that a partnership between certain utilities and municipal utility districts could alleviate some of the debt burden of the municipal utility districts and allow investment in other community projects and facilities. C.S.S.B. 1842 seeks to address this issue by providing for an application for the amendment of certain certificates of convenience and necessity.
|
||||||||||||||||
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
|
||||||||||||||||
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.
|
||||||||||||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.S.B. 1842 amends the Water Code to authorize a Class A utility to apply to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for an amendment of a certificate of convenience and necessity held by a municipal utility district not located wholly or partly inside of the corporate limits or extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality with a population of two million or more to allow the utility to have the same rights and powers under the certificate as the district. The bill requires the application to be accompanied by information identifying the applicant, the identifying number of the certificate of convenience and necessity to be amended, the written consent of the district that holds the certificate of convenience and necessity, a written statement by the district that the application is supported by a contract between the district and the utility for the utility to provide services inside the certificated area and inside the boundaries of the district, and a description of the proposed service area. The bill prohibits the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) from requiring any information for an application other than the information required by the bill.
C.S.S.B. 1842 requires the PUC to review whether the application is complete, not later than the 60th day after the date an applicant files an application for an amendment. The bill requires the PUC, if the PUC finds that the application is complete, to find that the amendment of the certificate is necessary for the service, accommodation, convenience, or safety of the public and grant the application and amend the certificate. The bill makes the PUC decision final after reconsideration, if any, authorized by PUC rule and prohibits the decision from being appealed. The bill establishes that the consent of a municipality is not required for the PUC to amend a certificate for an area that is in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction. The bill exempts an application from certain provisions relating to granting a new certificate of convenience and necessity which may require construction of a physically separate water or sewer system and relating to granting a certificate for a service area within the municipal boundaries or extraterritorial jurisdiction of municipalities with a population of 500,000 or more. The bill exempts an application for an amendment of a certificate of convenience and necessity under the bill's provisions from the Administrative Procedure Act.
C.S.S.B. 1842 amends the Health and Safety Code to include among the entities exempt from the requirement to file a business plan for a public drinking water supply system with the executive director of TCEQ a Class A utility that has applied for or been granted an amendment of a certificate of convenience and necessity under the bill's provisions for the area in which the construction of the system will operate.
|
||||||||||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2017.
|
||||||||||||||||
COMPARISON OF SENATE ENGROSSED AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.S.B. 1842 may differ from the engrossed in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the engrossed and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|