LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION March 21, 2011 TO: Honorable Allan Ritter, Chair, House Committee on Natural Resources FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB1223 by Workman (Relating to the procedures by which certain small water and sewer utilities may change rates.), As Introduced No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. The bill would establish procedures for small water or sewer utilities with fewer than 1,000 taps or connections to change their water rates. A small utility would be required to seek customer approval for any rate increase through an election held using a prescribed method. If the increase is approved by the ratepayers, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) would be required to administratively certify the increase. If the rate increase is not approved by the ratepayers, the utility would be authorized to file a rate change with the TCEQ. If a hearing were held on the rate increase, the utility would not be authorized to recover rate case expenses. The bill also would require the TCEQ to appoint a public advocate to represent the ratepayers at a hearing. In addition, a utility would not be authorized to hold a rate election more than once in a 24-month period, unless the TCEQ would grant an exemption. The TCEQ reports that the bill would expand its role with regard to rate hearings because the agency would be required to track the voting period for rate elections, determine the outcome of each rate election, and appoint a public advocate to represent ratepayers at rate hearings for small utilities. This estimate assumes that the public advocate position would be an additional expense to the agency. However, this estimate assumes that the cost would not be significant and could be absorbed using existing agency resources. Local Government Impact No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated. Source Agencies:582 Commission on Environmental Quality LBB Staff: JOB, SZ, TL
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
March 21, 2011
TO: Honorable Allan Ritter, Chair, House Committee on Natural Resources FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB1223 by Workman (Relating to the procedures by which certain small water and sewer utilities may change rates.), As Introduced
TO: Honorable Allan Ritter, Chair, House Committee on Natural Resources
FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB1223 by Workman (Relating to the procedures by which certain small water and sewer utilities may change rates.), As Introduced
Honorable Allan Ritter, Chair, House Committee on Natural Resources
Honorable Allan Ritter, Chair, House Committee on Natural Resources
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
HB1223 by Workman (Relating to the procedures by which certain small water and sewer utilities may change rates.), As Introduced
HB1223 by Workman (Relating to the procedures by which certain small water and sewer utilities may change rates.), As Introduced
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
The bill would establish procedures for small water or sewer utilities with fewer than 1,000 taps or connections to change their water rates. A small utility would be required to seek customer approval for any rate increase through an election held using a prescribed method. If the increase is approved by the ratepayers, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) would be required to administratively certify the increase. If the rate increase is not approved by the ratepayers, the utility would be authorized to file a rate change with the TCEQ. If a hearing were held on the rate increase, the utility would not be authorized to recover rate case expenses. The bill also would require the TCEQ to appoint a public advocate to represent the ratepayers at a hearing. In addition, a utility would not be authorized to hold a rate election more than once in a 24-month period, unless the TCEQ would grant an exemption. The TCEQ reports that the bill would expand its role with regard to rate hearings because the agency would be required to track the voting period for rate elections, determine the outcome of each rate election, and appoint a public advocate to represent ratepayers at rate hearings for small utilities. This estimate assumes that the public advocate position would be an additional expense to the agency. However, this estimate assumes that the cost would not be significant and could be absorbed using existing agency resources.
The bill would establish procedures for small water or sewer utilities with fewer than 1,000 taps or connections to change their water rates. A small utility would be required to seek customer approval for any rate increase through an election held using a prescribed method. If the increase is approved by the ratepayers, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) would be required to administratively certify the increase. If the rate increase is not approved by the ratepayers, the utility would be authorized to file a rate change with the TCEQ. If a hearing were held on the rate increase, the utility would not be authorized to recover rate case expenses. The bill also would require the TCEQ to appoint a public advocate to represent the ratepayers at a hearing. In addition, a utility would not be authorized to hold a rate election more than once in a 24-month period, unless the TCEQ would grant an exemption.
The TCEQ reports that the bill would expand its role with regard to rate hearings because the agency would be required to track the voting period for rate elections, determine the outcome of each rate election, and appoint a public advocate to represent ratepayers at rate hearings for small utilities. This estimate assumes that the public advocate position would be an additional expense to the agency. However, this estimate assumes that the cost would not be significant and could be absorbed using existing agency resources.
Local Government Impact
No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.
Source Agencies: 582 Commission on Environmental Quality
582 Commission on Environmental Quality
LBB Staff: JOB, SZ, TL
JOB, SZ, TL