[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6100223,"mediaKeyId","2813713-61dfdbe262747efa5913d35b52a39c10","parentId",2813713,"title","Committee hears bill to update Missouri 811 law; sponsors, contractors back tracer-wire requirement","audioSeconds",2036,"startMs",70000,"endMs",2106000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813713-61dfdbe262747efa5913d35b52a39c10&start=70&end=2106","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813713-61dfdbe262747efa5913d35b52a39c10/thumbnail_70000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6100223/Missouri/Committee-hears-bill-to-update-Missouri-811-law-sponsors-contractors-back-tracer-wire-requirement","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100223-d2a42d8f9145c087eb1c954c672a9b43/orig.mp4?Expires=1773647597&Signature=AyOThoim~AbJKJsxoPOTyhNwMHpioSIIcEdEc7HdyC5K86rFN-u-DuSlZ3lhBppFV0ncmVY1kPpyr1w1MU8nAvGYG6xz3BFpqW4~ItINC3U7SHhIDo0eMPNX44zRph6paWOfwuHcFaNGHOhHtLfcYsqqVYBzvsh4aI1L6nf7AjfeZi6~1-mbUOBr-D-h415ObtdzGpT1fnfUjtKikwQrkxHbrNWUQonarnsgK9~GX-iwtroEThTtVxx4H-9zlkEYpsO~0GHNbdst8PkNbTiyWLM3KJXdHeP8WECJD4POz-re4F7lXbNnZgSelAV-vP~y3YfVWXRKW9DQ~xZDD8lX7w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Missouri Legislature","date","2025-03-26T00:00:00Z","article","The Missouri House Committee on Utilities heard testimony on House Bill 752, a proposal to update the state’s underground facility damage‑prevention statute (commonly known as 811). Representative Josh Herbert (R., District 8), speaking as sponsor, described the bill as “a long overdue update on Missouri’s underground facility law” and said it would require tracer wire on most new underground installations, add seats for excavators on the 811 board and change some liability rules for strikes of mismarked lines.

Supporters told the committee the measure is intended to reduce repair costs and improve worker and public safety. Ed Tweedhaus, vice president of Tweedhaus Excavating and representing the Associated General Contractors of Missouri, said Missouri’s current system has lagged industry practice and cited industry estimates that the state suffers large annual losses from struck lines. “We support HB 752 because we believe it will accomplish two things, reducing waste and increasing safety,” Tweedhaus said.

Randy Norden, executive director of Missouri 811, described how the notification center operates and how the industry currently tracks underground facilities. Norden said the 811 center handles about 1.5 million locate requests per year and that a single locate request typically triggers multiple notifications to utilities. He said the center is funded by a per‑notification fee of $1.35 and that utilities supply mapping and marking information; the center does not itself create or verify precise utility maps. “The mission statement of Missouri 811 is to enhance public safety and reduce damages to underground facilities,” Norden said.

Committee members asked how the bill would apply to private‑service lines, depth exemptions and enforcement. Herbert and witnesses said the bill as written would apply broadly to newly installed lines but that a committee substitute expected next week will add carve‑outs — for example, for deep sewer lines — and other negotiated changes. Herbert said the substitute would be the product of ongoing negotiations and is intended to refine several provisions in the current text.

Witnesses explained technical elements the bill would promote. Tweedhaus and Norden said the bill aligns Missouri law with National Common Ground Alliance best practices by authorizing additional detection methods such as tracer wire and electronic white‑lining, and by giving excavators and locators a voting role on the 811 board. Norden described existing board bylaws as providing up to 15 voting utility members and advisory seats for excavators and locators; the bill would convert some advisory representation into formal voting seats.

Committee members also pressed on liability and enforcement. Herbert and Tweedhaus said current law makes excavators liable for struck lines but that HB 752 would limit liability where a line was mismarked; the sponsor and witnesses said the substitute will include exceptions if an excavator acts carelessly. Norden and Tweedhaus explained that when a line is struck the excavator must file a damage ticket and utilities may pursue civil remedies or fines under existing law.

Support for the bill was expressed by the Associated General Contractors of Missouri, Missouri 811 and the American Council of Engineering Companies in Missouri. No formal vote was taken; the committee hearing concluded after testimony and questions, and sponsors told members they expected a substitute with negotiated changes to be filed next week.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Utilities Wednesday, Mar 26, 2025 8:00 AM - 9:23 AM","oneSentenceSummary","The Missouri House Committee on Utilities heard testimony on House Bill 752, a proposal to update the state’s underground facility damage‑prevention statute (commonly known as 811).","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MO, Missouri","taxId",77693,"location","Missouri","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100218,"Committee hears widespread concern over bill limiting additional meter charges; sponsors say language needs work",2159,2110000,4269000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813713-61dfdbe262747efa5913d35b52a39c10&start=2110&end=4269","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813713-61dfdbe262747efa5913d35b52a39c10/thumbnail_2110000.jpg","/articles/6100218/Missouri/Committee-hears-widespread-concern-over-bill-limiting-additional-meter-charges-sponsors-say-language-needs-work","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100218-a769c8f8f2b95f0a7f6ca2125552fe97/orig.mp4?Expires=1773647597&Signature=GmHQLyxY7VvOMvl0SyxFYTbYYYn1llGS1y3bZQcEV7wKciZYqfIFUWpGgh5yiGYVVMIl0jDwBacDRnw9vGQntXHerFyntwO2YN~Wj~J5lKjRwX~dYDOU5po75KaMkCPJNygjtolRtw1tSz9MNRcrU6tKvreGICzv1UBbDKzsmpz4au1bxpt8t-PEx8ns-Z6M3QkMJ14V~x3jkJRRqyaaD~WMeq16cNhbkbP27VziRBqR-eycdYVeJJzpmfYGpIz9cc45r0cMpW5iLZ3GslMCJNHONJPWcYTdgWJzutvLeU~Vkg1PLYRpPUtHSO1mFA0MNOS9rr74joaVl8gqWrSW3A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Missouri House Committee on Utilities took testimony on House Bill 1178, a proposal to limit a utility’s ability to collect an ongoing fixed monthly meter (customer) charge for additional meters at the same physical address. Representative Vanderman, sponsor of the bill, told the committee the measure is intended to prevent ongoing duplicative fixed charges where no additional fixed infrastructure was installed.

Vanderman described an example from a constituent who had an outbuilding about 50 feet from a primary residence and said the household was paying an additional monthly meter charge of about $48 while the incremental billed usage averaged about $7 per month. “My idea behind the bill was to limit the ability for an ongoing fixed cost charge to an additional meter when there isn’t any additional fixed costs,” the sponsor said, while acknowledging the bill’s language is broad and “needs some work.” The bill would, as drafted, allow utilities to recover the meter charge for one year to offset the initial installation.

Municipal utilities, electric cooperatives and investor‑owned gas and electric companies testified in opposition or requested clarification. Connie Ford, chief member services officer for the Missouri Association of Municipal Utilities, said the bill fails to define whether the customer charge applies per utility service (electric, water, gas) or per postal address and urged clearer definitions for “customer charge” and for how multiple utilities serving the same postal address would be treated.

Amber Overfelt, general manager and CEO of Howard Electric Cooperative, said many rural members prefer separate meters for farm shops, irrigation and seasonal loads; cooperatives set customer charges and line‑extension policies through member‑elected boards and said removing a second service fee could reduce revenue and shift costs to other members. Overfelt said her cooperative’s residential service availability fee is $39 a month and explained that cooperative rate classes and line‑extension practices vary widely.

Investor‑owned utilities told the committee the proposal raises regulatory conflicts. Zach Monroe of Ameren Missouri cited the Public Service Commission’s tariff definition of a customer charge and used Ameren’s existing tariffs to show how meter charges and kilowatt‑hour rates interact: under Ameren’s current residential and small‑general‑service tariffs, Monroe said, a second meter can become cost‑effective for a customer once usage in the outbuilding exceeds about 70 kilowatt‑hours per month.

Other witnesses in opposition included Evergy, Liberty Utilities and the Missouri Natural Gas Association. Testimony highlighted several recurring concerns: the bill’s use of “postal address” as the trigger for a single customer charge, the need to preserve rate‑class distinctions (residential, small commercial, large commercial, irrigation), and the risk of unintended cross‑subsidization where one customer’s decisions would shift fixed costs to other customers.

Committee members asked practical questions about multiple homes sharing a single bill, situations on large rural properties with a single postal address, and how investor‑owned utilities and municipals recover fixed costs through tariffs or board decisions. Representative Vanderman said the hearing had been “very informational” and that the bill would need drafting changes to address the many operational and regulatory complexities raised by witnesses. No committee vote was taken.

Because the testimony raised significant definitional and regulatory issues, several witnesses and members urged more precise drafting before the bill is moved further in the process.","House Bill 1178 would limit a utility’s ability to charge an ongoing additional meter (customer) fee at the same postal address. Municipal utilities, cooperatives and investor‑owned utilities told the House Committee on Utilities the bill is too broad and needs clearer definitions for customer charge, service location and rate classes.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears bill to update Missouri 811 law; sponsors, contractors back tracer-wire requirement

Committee hears widespread concern over bill limiting additional meter charges; sponsors say language needs work