Requires approval by the general assembly before the construction of certain electrical transmission lines
Impact
If enacted, House Bill 1752 would enhance state oversight over significant utility projects, potentially reducing the speed at which electrical transmission lines are developed. Proponents argue that this additional layer of approval can ensure that the construction aligns with public service needs and environmental considerations. By requiring legislative approval, the bill aims to involve the General Assembly in decision-making processes, making it more transparent and accountable.
Summary
House Bill 1752 focuses on the regulation of electrical transmission line construction within the state of Missouri. It mandates that no gas, electrical, water, or sewer corporation may begin the construction of certain facilities—including electrical transmission lines capable of transmitting electricity exceeding 230 kilovolts—without first obtaining specific statutory authorization from the General Assembly. This stipulation is intended to provide an additional layer of oversight and control regarding the expansion and operation of critical utility infrastructure.
Contention
The bill might evoke contention among utility companies, who may view these new requirements as bureaucratic hurdles that could delay important infrastructure projects. Critics may argue that such stringent regulations could impede development, especially in areas where there is an urgent need for upgraded or new electrical transmission capacity. The balance between ensuring public interest through legislation and facilitating timely construction by corporations represents a significant point of debate.
Additional_points
The bill outlines conditions under which the state commission may grant permission for construction, indicating that the commission would assess proposals based on their necessity or convenience for public service. This detailed approach reflects a broader trend towards centralized regulation in utility operations, highlighting ongoing discussions around local versus state control in utility management.