Tennessee House Bill HB2876

Tennessee 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/31/24

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 11; Title 43; Title 44; Title 59; Title 60; Title 64; Title 68; Title 69 and Title 70, relative to natural resources.

Impact

The implications of HB 2876 are significant in that the change from calendar days to business days may improve operational efficiency within state agencies responsible for overseeing natural resources. However, this extension could also result in slower responses to applications or permits, potentially affecting individuals and businesses reliant on timely decisions in matters related to land use and resource development. It notably impacts how regulations are applied in practice, ensuring stakeholders have a more manageable timeframe to prepare required documentation and interact with state agencies.

Summary

House Bill 2876 amends several sections of the Tennessee Code Annotated, specifically focusing on natural resources across multiple titles. One primary change includes redefining the timeframe in which certain actions must be taken from 'five days' to 'five business days', thereby extending the processing time for related administrative actions. This modification is intended to provide more flexibility and allow for efficiency when dealing with natural resource management, reflecting an acknowledgment of the needs of both state operations and stakeholders in these sectors.

Sentiment

General sentiment around HB 2876 appears moderate, with support drawn primarily from those who believe that providing additional time aligns with best practices in regulatory management. Advocates assert that this change balances the need for thorough review processes while maintaining efficient administrative functions. However, there may be concerns among individuals or groups advocating for swift resource development, who might view this as a hindrance to what they perceive as timely opportunities.

Contention

The notable points of contention surrounding HB 2876 seem to focus on the balance of extending timelines for regulatory compliance and the efficiency of governmental operations. Critics may argue that longer waits could impede economic activities or environmental protections, while proponents suggest that a considerate approach to regulation could mitigate risks associated with rushed decisions. Thus, the debate encapsulates broader discussions on regulatory reform and its effects on the state's natural resource policy.