Senator Dean Zaffirini, the bill author, told the Committee on Water, Agriculture & Rural Affairs that Senate Bill 2,568 would let a "qualified local sponsor" use a statutory permit exemption to construct or maintain storage facilities of not more than 200 acre-feet for erosion, floodwater and sediment control.

The bill "would define the term qualified local sponsor, allow a qualified local sponsor to use a permit exemption to construct or maintain ... a storage facility of not more than 200 acre feet of water," Zaffirini said. He also told the committee a committee substitute had been filed to adopt the Legislative Council draft.

Ed McCarthy, testifying for the Plum Creek Conservation District, said the structures Plum Creek operates are representative of thousands across Texas and have "operated very well." McCarthy said federal dollars support rehabilitation and that timely work is increasingly important because surrounding development has reclassified some ponds as high-hazard. "This bill is important because the structures that Plum Creek operates are replicated around the state," McCarthy said.

Jim Clarno, general manager of the Lower Brushy Creek WCID and representing the Texas Association of Watershed Sponsors, said normal permitting "adds about 300 days to the construction period" and can increase project costs "8 to 10 percent." Clarno said the exemption would remove delays for small projects and allow sponsors to perform necessary maintenance in a timelier and more cost-effective way.

Committee members asked procedural and drafting questions; no formal amendments were recorded in committee debate. The committee later adopted the committee substitute and voted the bill out of committee by recorded tally (6 ayes, 0 nays), reporting it favorably to the full Senate.

Supporters framed the change as limited and specific: captured water may be used only on the property for rehabilitation and maintenance of the dam or reservoir and the exempt status would continue while the reservoir remains owned by the district. Opponents did not register testimony in committee and no public witnesses requested opposition time during the hearing.

The bill was reported favorably to the full Senate; further changes could be made on the Senate floor or in conference with the House if enacted there.