Texas Senate Bill SB1625

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of Senate Committee: 4/5/11
• Introduced: 3/11/11
• Voted on by Senate: 4/11/11
• Refer: 3/23/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/10/11
• Report Pass: 4/5/11
• Engrossed: 4/11/11
• Refer: 4/14/11
• Report Pass: 5/3/11

Caption

Relating to the administration, powers, duties, and operation of the Edwards Aquifer Authority.

Impact

The bill is poised to impact Texas water laws significantly, particularly those related to the withdrawal and management of groundwater. By explicitly outlining the authority's right to regulate and oversee water conservation activities, the bill reinforces its role in protecting water resources while also providing a structured framework for permits. This legislative action is expected to improve management of the aquifer, ensuring that both current and future groundwater users comply with designated conservation practices, thus potentially mitigating environmental impacts related to over-extraction.

Summary

SB1625 pertains to the administration, powers, duties, and operation of the Edwards Aquifer Authority. It details significant amendments to the existing statutes that govern the authority, enhancing its mandate to manage groundwater resources effectively. One key aspect of the bill is the emphasis on conservation practices, including the ability for the authority to issue permits for groundwater withdrawal which must now specify maximum rates and total volumes. This marks a substantial regulatory shift intended to ensure sustainable use of the aquifer's resources, particularly in the face of growing concerns over water scarcity and environmental conservation.

Contention

While proponents of SB1625 argue that it addresses critical issues surrounding water conservation and management, opponents may raise concerns about the balance of power between state authority and local control. As the authority is granted broad powers to regulate groundwater extraction, there may be apprehensions regarding the implications for local water users and conservation districts, particularly those who may feel their regulatory powers are diminished. Monitoring and enforcement mechanisms outlined in the bill could also lead to disputes over compliance and the extent of authority to supervise extraction practices.